Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35896029›Full record

ArticleJMIR formative research2022

Detection of Potential Arbovirus Infections and Pregnancy Complications in Pregnant Women in Jamaica Using a Smartphone App (ZIKApp): Pilot Evaluation Study.

Elisa Ruiz-Burga, Patricia Bruijning-Verhagen, Paulette Palmer, Annalisa Sandcroft, Georgina Fernandes, Marieke de Hoog, Lenroy Bryan, Russell Pierre, Heather Bailey, Carlo Giaquinto and 3 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR formative research, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
1.1field-weighted citation impact, top 21% 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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Use of Digital Tools in Arbovirus Surveillance: Scoping Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2024
    Article
  2. Arboviruses and pregnancy: are the threats visible or hidden?Tropical diseases, travel medicine and vaccines · 2024
    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

13 authors at 5 institutions in 4 countries.

Elisa Ruiz-BurgaPopulation, Policy & Practice Research and Teaching Department, Great Ormond Street Institute of Child Health, University College London, London, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0529-0372
Patricia Bruijning-VerhagenJulius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, Utrecht, Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4105-9669
Paulette PalmerDepartment of Child and Adolescent Health, University of the West Indies, Kingston, Jamaica.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8840-3207
Annalisa SandcroftDepartment of Child and Adolescent Health, University of the West Indies, Kingston, Jamaica.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3130-3007
Georgina FernandesPopulation, Policy & Practice Research and Teaching Department, Great Ormond Street Institute of Child Health, University College London, London, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2056-8376
Marieke de HoogUniversity Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, Utrecht, Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7406-0909
Lenroy BryanDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, University of the West Indies, Kingston, Jamaica.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6312-3716
Russell PierreDepartment of Child and Adolescent Health, University of the West Indies, Kingston, Jamaica.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4004-4756
Heather BaileyInstitute for Global Health, University College London, London, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3266-1041
Carlo GiaquintoDipartimento di Salute della Donna e del Bambino, Università degli Studi di Padova, Padova, Italy.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9365-0413
Claire ThornePopulation, Policy & Practice Research and Teaching Department, Great Ormond Street Institute of Child Health, University College London, London, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0389-1956
Celia D C ChristieDepartment of Child and Adolescent Health, University of the West Indies, Kingston, Jamaica.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8981-3934
ZIKAction Consortium *Fondazione Penta Onlus, Padova, Italy.
University of the West Indies · JMGreat Ormond Street Hospital · GBUtrecht University · NLUniversity College London · GBUniversity of Padua · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThere is growing evidence of the benefits of mobile health technology, which include symptom tracking apps for research, surveillance, and prevention. No study has yet addressed arbovirus symptom tracking in pregnancy.

objectiveThis study aimed to evaluate the use of a smartphone app (ZIKApp) to self-report arbovirus symptoms and pregnancy complications and to assess compliance with daily symptom diaries during pregnancy in a cohort of women in an arbovirus-endemic, subtropical, middle-income country (Jamaica).

methodsPregnant women aged ≥16 years, having a smartphone, and planning on giving birth at the recruiting center were enrolled between February 2020 and July 2020. ZIKApp comprised a daily symptom diary based on algorithms to identify potential episodes of arbovirus infection and pregnancy complications. Sociodemographic, epidemiological, and obstetric information was collected at enrollment, with additional review of medical records, and users' perception was collected through an exit survey. Descriptive analyses and logistic regression analysis of possible factors associated with diary adherence were performed.

resultsOf the 173 women enrolled, 157 (90.8%) used ZIKApp for a median duration of 155 (IQR 127-173) days until pregnancy end, 6 (3.5%) used the app for <7 days, and 10 (5.8%) exited the study early. For each successive 30-day period from enrollment up to 150 days after enrollment, of these 157 women, 121 (77.1%) to 129 (82.2%) completed their daily symptom diary; 50 (31.8%) to 56 (35.7%) did so on the same day. Overall, 31.8% (50/157) of the women had good adherence to diary reporting (ie, they completed the task on the same day or 2 to 3 days later for ≥80% of the days enrolled). There were 3-fold higher odds of good adherence for participants aged >34 years versus those aged 25 to 29 years (adjusted odds ratio 3.14, 95% CI 1.10-8.98) and 2-fold higher odds for women with tertiary versus secondary education (adjusted odds ratio 2.26, 95% CI 1.06-4.83). Of the 161 women who ever made a diary entry, 5454 individual symptom reports were made (median 17 per woman; IQR 4-42; range 0-278); 9 (5.6%) women reported symptom combinations triggering a potential arbovirus episode (none had an adverse pregnancy outcome) and 55 (34.2%) reported painful uterine contractions or vaginal bleeding, mainly in the month before delivery. Overall, 51.8% (71/137) of the women rated the app as an excellent experience and were less likely to be poor diary adherers (P=.04) and 99.3% (138/139) reported that the app was easy to understand and use.

conclusionsThis pilot found a high adherence to ZIKApp. It demonstrated the feasibility and usability of the app in an arbovirus-endemic region, supporting its future development to contribute to surveillance and diagnosis of arbovirus infections in pregnancy and to optimize maternal care.

Indexed as

adherencearboviruscompliancedigital healthLMIClow- and middle-income countriesmaternal healthmHealthmobile phonepregnancypregnancy complicationspregnancy outcomesprenatal care

Identifiers

PMID35896029
PMCPMC9377438
OpenAlexW4245530171

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.