Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30892269›Full record

ArticleJMIR formative research2019

Development of PositiveLinks: A Mobile Phone App to Promote Linkage and Retention in Care for People With HIV.

Colleen Laurence, Erin Wispelwey, Tabor E Flickinger, Marika Grabowski, Ava Lena Waldman, Erin Plews-Ogan, Claire Debolt, George Reynolds, Wendy Cohn, Karen Ingersoll and 1 more

Registry-linked trialAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR formative research, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04998019 (Pragmatic Efficacy Trial of mHealth to Improve HIV Outcomes in the DC Cohort), which is not on this map. Cited by 34 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
34citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

NCT04998019 nacompletednot on this mapstarted 2022, after this paper: background citation

Pragmatic Efficacy Trial of mHealth to Improve HIV Outcomes in the DC Cohort

TypeinterventionalSponsorGeorge Washington UniversityRan2022 to 2025Enrolled682ConditionsHIV/AIDSArmsPositiveLinks
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

34 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Observational
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Observational
  19. Article
  20. Article
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

11 authors.

Colleen LaurenceDepartment of Medicine, University of Virginia School of Medicine, Charlottesville, VA, United States.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1807-7917
Erin WispelweyDepartment of Medicine, University of Virginia School of Medicine, Charlottesville, VA, United States.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9940-7518
Tabor E FlickingerDepartment of Medicine, University of Virginia School of Medicine, Charlottesville, VA, United States.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8820-2536
Marika GrabowskiDepartment of Medicine, University of Virginia School of Medicine, Charlottesville, VA, United States.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4332-1974
Ava Lena WaldmanDepartment of Medicine, University of Virginia School of Medicine, Charlottesville, VA, United States.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7784-3159
Erin Plews-OganDepartment of Medicine, University of Virginia School of Medicine, Charlottesville, VA, United States.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4998-9625
Claire DeboltDepartment of Medicine, University of Virginia School of Medicine, Charlottesville, VA, United States.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4467-095X
George ReynoldsHealth Decision Technologies, Oakland, CA, United States.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6810-9166
Wendy CohnDepartment of Public Health Sciences, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, VA, United States.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4351-8497
Karen IngersollDepartment of Psychiatry and Neurobehavioral Sciences, University of Virginia School of Medicine, Charlottesville, VA, United States.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8115-2548
Rebecca DillinghamDepartment of Medicine, University of Virginia School of Medicine, Charlottesville, VA, United States.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9748-1215

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundLinkage to and retention in HIV care are challenging, especially in the Southeastern United States. The rise in mobile phone app use and the potential for an app to deliver just in time messaging provides a new opportunity to improve linkage and retention among people living with HIV (PLWH).

objectiveThis study aimed to develop an app to engage, link, and retain people in care. We evaluated the acceptability, feasibility, and impact of the app among users.

methodsApp development was informed by principles of chronic disease self-management and formative interviews with PLWH. Once developed, the app was distributed among participants, and usability feedback was incorporated in subsequent iterations. We interviewed app users after 3 weeks to identify usability issues, need for training on the phone or app, and to assess acceptability. We tracked and analyzed usage of app features for the cohort over 2 years.

resultsA total of 77 participants used the app during the pilot study. The query response rate for the first 2 years was 47.7%. Query response declined at a rate of 0.67% per month. The community message board was the most popular feature, and 77.9% (60/77) of users posted on the board at least once during the 2 years.

conclusionsThe PositiveLinks app was feasible and acceptable among nonurban PLWH. High participation on the community message board suggests that social support from peers is important for people recently diagnosed with or returning to care for HIV.

Indexed as

HIVmHealthretention in caretreatment adherence and compliance

Identifiers

PMID30892269
PMCPMC6446157

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

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.