ReviewDigital health
Exploring the equity impact of mobile health-based human immunodeficiency virus interventions: A systematic review of reviews and evidence synthesis.
Review in Digital health. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
12 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Consideration of inequalities in effectiveness trials of mHealth applications - a systematic assessment of studies from an umbrella review.International journal for equity in health · 2024Pooled it
- The impact of smartphone app-based interventions on adolescents' dietary intake: a systematic review and evaluation of equity factor reporting in intervention studies.Nutrition reviews · 2024Pooled it
- How effects on health equity are assessed in systematic reviews of interventions.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2022Pooled it
- Effectiveness of cash-plus programmes on early childhood outcomes compared to cash transfers alone: A systematic review and meta-analysis in low- and middle-income countries.PLoS medicine · 2021Pooled it
- Expanding the Evidence on the Safety and Efficiency of 2-Way Text Messaging-Based Telehealth for Voluntary Medical Male Circumcision Follow-up Compared With In-Person Reviews: Randomized Controlled Trial in Rural and Urban South Africa.Journal of medical Internet research · 2023Trial
- Curating an HIV mHealth App for People Living with HIV in Washington, DC Through Think-Aloud Usability Testing and Beta Testing.AIDS and behavior · 2025Article
- How Mobile Health Can Change the Contexts of Living With HIV and Engaging With Treatment and Care in Iran: A Realist-Informed Qualitative Study.Qualitative health research · 2025Article
- The Report of Access and Engagement With Digital Health Interventions Among Children and Young People: Systematic Review.JMIR pediatrics and parenting · 2024Review
- Differential uptake and effects of digital sexually transmitted and bloodborne infection testing interventions among equity-seeking groups: a scoping review.Sexually transmitted infections · 2023Article
- Article
- Use and barriers to the use of telehealth services in the Arab population in Israel: a cross sectional survey.Israel journal of health policy research · 2023Article
- Inequities in Health Care Services Caused by the Adoption of Digital Health Technologies: Scoping Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveWhile mobile health-based human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) interventions are often designed to promote health equity, systematic differences in the use of and access to mobile technologies may counteract that and widen treatment gaps. This systematic review applies an equity lens to investigate whether existing research provides adequate evidence on the ethical implications of mHealth technologies in HIV treatment and prevention.
methodsThis study included a two-stage methodology, consisting of (a) a systematic review of systematic reviews and (b) an evidence synthesis of primary studies. For the review of reviews we searched eight electronic databases, eight electronic journals and Google Scholar. We also screened reference lists and consulted authors of included studies. Primary studies were extracted from eligible reviews. We based our data extraction and analysis on the Place of residence, Race, Occupation, Gender/Sex, Religion, Education, Socioeconomic status, Social capital and other disadvantage related characteristics (PROGRESS-Plus) framework and the use of harvest plots, focusing on the socio-demographic distribution of mHealth effects.
resultsA total of 8786 citations resulted in 19 eligible reviews and 39 eligible primary studies. Existing reviews did not provide any analyses of the equity impacts of mobile health-based HIV initiatives. Information availability was higher in primary studies, predominantly suggesting no social gradient of mobile health-based HIV interventions. Overall, evidence remains weak and not sufficient to allow for confident equity statements.
conclusionsDespite the negative force of socio-demographic inequities and the emerging nature of mobile health technologies, evidence on the equity implications of mobile health interventions for HIV care remains scarce. Not knowing how the effects of mobile health technologies differ across population subgroups inevitably limits our capacities to equitably adopt, adjust and integrate mobile health interventions towards reaching those disproportionally affected by the epidemic.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.