Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33772406›Full record

ReviewCurrent HIV/AIDS reports2021

Ethical Implications of eHealth Tools for Delivering STI/HIV Laboratory Results and Partner Notifications.

Motlatso Godongwana, Juanita Chewparsad, Limakatso Lebina, Jonathan Golub, Neil Martinson, Brooke A Jarrett

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Current HIV/AIDS reports, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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.

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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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

6 authors.

Motlatso GodongwanaPerinatal HIV Research Unit, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa. Godongwanam@phru.co.za.ORCID 0000-0002-0981-732X
Juanita ChewparsadPerinatal HIV Research Unit, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa.
Limakatso LebinaPerinatal HIV Research Unit, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa.
Jonathan GolubCenter for TB Research, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, USA.
Neil MartinsonPerinatal HIV Research Unit, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa.
Brooke A JarrettProgramme in Demography and Population Studies, University of the Witwatersrand, Schools of Public Health and Social Sciences, Johannesburg, South Africa.

Funding

The Role of an Artificially Intelligent Chatbot in Social Support, Antiretroviral Adherence, and Depressive Symptoms among Young Adults Living with HIV in South AfricaF31MH121128 · NIMH · JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY · PI JARRETT, BROOKE · 2020 to 2021
$92k
NIMH NIH HHS F31 MH121128
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purpose of revieweHealth tools are increasingly utilized for communication with patients. Although efficacious and cost-effective, these tools face several barriers that challenge their ethical use in sexual health. We reviewed literature from the past decade to pick illustrative studies of eHealth tools that deliver results of laboratory tests for sexually transmitted infections, including the human immunodeficiency virus, as well as partner notifications. We describe ethical implications for such technologies. RECENT

findingsOur review found that despite widespread research on the use of eHealth tools in delivering laboratory results and partner notifications, these studies rarely measured or reported on the ethical implications. Such implications can be organized according to the four major principles in bioethics: beneficence, patient autonomy, non-maleficence, and justice. The beneficence of eHealth typically measures efficacy in comparison to existing standards of care. Patient autonomy includes the ability to opt in or out of eHealth tools, right-based principles of consent, and sovereignty over healthcare data. To adhere to the principle of non-maleficence, relevant harms must be identified and measured-such as unintentional disclosure of illness, sexual orientation, or sexual activity. Justice must also be considered to accommodate all users equally, irrespective of their literacy level, with easy-to-use platforms that provide clear messages. Based on case studies from this review, we developed a list of recommendations for the ethical development and evaluation of eHealth platforms to deliver STI/HIV results to patients and notifications to partners.

Indexed as

HIV InfectionsSexually Transmitted DiseasesTelemedicineContact TracingFemaleHumansLaboratoriesMaleSexual PartnersBioethicsContact tracingeHealthHIVInformed consentLaboratoriesPartner notificationSexually transmitted diseaseSexual partnersTelemedicine

Identifiers

PMID33772406
PMCPMC8057984

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.