Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30322858›Full record

ArticleSexually transmitted infections2019

Will an innovative connected AideSmart! app-based multiplex, point-of-care screening strategy for HIV and related coinfections affect timely quality antenatal screening of rural Indian women? Results from a cross-sectional study in India.

Nitika Pant Pai, Jana Daher, H R Prashanth, Achal Shetty, Rani Diana Sahni, Rajesh Kannangai, Priya Abraham, Rita Isaac

Open access · hybridAbstract readEvaluation Study
In one paragraph

Article in Sexually transmitted infections, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
2.6field-weighted citation impact, top 9% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

10 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 20 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Nitika Pant PaiDepartment of Medicine, McGill University, Montreal, Quebec, Canada nitika.pai@mcgill.ca.ORCID 0000-0002-4672-0500
Jana Daher *Division of Clinical Epidemiology, Research Institute of the McGill University Health Centre, Montreal, Canada.
H R Prashanth *Rural Unit for Health and Social Affairs (RUHSA), Christian Medical College, Vellore, Tamil Nadu, India.
Achal Shetty *Rural Unit for Health and Social Affairs (RUHSA), Christian Medical College, Vellore, Tamil Nadu, India.
Rani Diana SahniDepartment of Clinical Microbiology, Christian Medical College, Vellore, Tamil Nadu, India.
Rajesh KannangaiDepartment of Clinical Virology, Christian Medical College, Vellore, Tamil Nadu, India.
Priya AbrahamDepartment of Clinical Virology, Christian Medical College, Vellore, Tamil Nadu, India.
Rita IsaacRural Unit for Health and Social Affairs (RUHSA), Christian Medical College, Vellore, Tamil Nadu, India.
Christian Medical College, Vellore · INMcGill University Health Centre · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesIn rural pregnant Indian women, multiple missed antenatal screening opportunities due to inadequate public health facility-based screening result in undiagnosed HIV and sexually transmitted bloodborne infections (STBBIs) and conditions (anaemia). Untreated infections complicate pregnancy management, precipitate adverse outcomes and risk mother-to-child transmission. Additionally, a shortage of trained doctors, rural women's preference for home delivery and health illiteracy affect health service delivery. To address these issues, we developed AideSmart!, an innovative, app-based, cloud-connected, rapid screening strategy that offers multiplex screening for STBBIs and anaemia at the point of care. It offers connectivity, integration, expedited communications and linkages to clinical care throughout pregnancy.

methodsIn a cross-sectional study, we evaluated the AideSmart! strategy for feasibility, acceptability, preference and impact. We trained 15 healthcare professionals (HCPs) to offer the AideSmart! strategy to 510 pregnant women presenting for care to outreach rural service units of Christian Medical College, Vellore, India.

resultsWith the AideSmart! screening strategy, we recorded an acceptability of 100% (510/510), feasibility (completion rate) of 91.6% (466/510) and preference of 73%. We detected 239 infections/conditions (239/510, 46.8%) at the point-of-care, of which 168 (168/239; 70%) were lab confirmed, staged and treated rapidly. Of the 168 confirmed infections/conditions, 127 were anaemia, 11 Trichomonas and 30 hepatitis B virus (HBV) (25 resolved naturally, 5 active infections). Four infants (4/5; 80%) were prophylaxed for HBV and were declared disease-free at 9 months. Recruited participants were young; mean age was 24 years (range: 17-40) and 74% (376/510) were in their second trimester. Furthermore, 95% of the participants were retained throughout their pregnancy.

conclusionThe AideSmart! strategy was deemed feasible to operationalise by HCPs. It was accepted and preferred by participants, resulting in timely screening and treatment of HIV/STIs and anaemia, preventing mother-to-child transmission. The strategy could be reverse-innovated to any context to maximise its health impact.

Indexed as

Mobile ApplicationsPoint-of-Care SystemsAdolescentAdultCoinfectionCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleHealth PersonnelHIV InfectionsHumansIndiaInfantInfectious Disease Transmission, VerticalPregnancyPregnancy Complications, InfectiousPrenatal Caremultiplex, point-of-care, innovative, HIVSTBBI, antenatal care, cross-sectional study

Identifiers

PMID30322858
PMCPMC6580765
OpenAlexW2898049005

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.