ReviewEpidemiologic reviews2022
Addressing Health Inequities in Digital Clinical Trials: A Review of Challenges and Solutions From the Field of HIV Research.
Review in Epidemiologic reviews, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.
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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 24 citations in OpenAlex.
- Findings from the Tushirikiane mobile health (mHealth) HIV self-testing pragmatic trial with refugee adolescents and youth living in informal settlements in Kampala, Uganda.Journal of the International AIDS Society · 2023Trial
- Optimizing participation in digital health studies: understanding appointment attendance.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2026Article
- Trial Enrollment Correlates in an HIV Status-Neutral mHealth Intervention Among Young Black and Latinx Men and Transgender Women Who have Sex with Men.AIDS and behavior · 2026Article
- Perspectives on App-Assisted Self-Testing Using Rapid Diagnostic Tests Among Community Members, Health Care Providers, and Public Health Leaders in Kenya, South Africa, and Zambia: Qualitative Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Article
- Community-Based Organizations' Approaches to Recruitment and Retention for a Digital HIV Prevention Intervention for Young Men Who Have Sex With Men: A Mixed Methods Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Article
- A Cautionary Tale: Digital Clinical Trial Implementation of a Couples-Based HIV Prevention Study among Transgender Women and Their Partners in the United States.AIDS and behavior · 2025Article
- Recommendations for the equitable integration of digital health interventions across the HIV care cascade.Communications medicine · 2024Article
- Associations between water insecurity and mental health outcomes among lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and queer persons in Bangkok, Thailand and Mumbai, India: Cross-sectional survey findings.Global mental health (Cambridge, England) · 2024Article
- Stigma, social and structural vulnerability, and mental health among transgender women: A partial least square path modeling analysis.Journal of nursing scholarship : an official publication of Sigma Theta Tau International Honor Society of Nursing · 2024Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
Clinical trials are considered the gold standard for establishing efficacy of health interventions, thus determining which interventions are brought to scale in health care and public health programs. Digital clinical trials, broadly defined as trials that have partial to full integration of technology across implementation, interventions, and/or data collection, are valued for increased efficiencies as well as testing of digitally delivered interventions. Although recent reviews have described the advantages and disadvantages of and provided recommendations for improving scientific rigor in the conduct of digital clinical trials, few to none have investigated how digital clinical trials address the digital divide, whether they are equitably accessible, and if trial outcomes are potentially beneficial only to those with optimal and consistent access to technology. Human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), among other health conditions, disproportionately affects socially and economically marginalized populations, raising questions of whether interventions found to be efficacious in digital clinical trials and subsequently brought to scale will sufficiently and consistently reach and provide benefit to these populations. We reviewed examples from HIV research from across geographic settings to describe how digital clinical trials can either reproduce or mitigate health inequities via the design and implementation of the digital clinical trials and, ultimately, the programs that result. We discuss how digital clinical trials can be intentionally designed to prevent inequities, monitor ongoing access and utilization, and assess for differential impacts among subgroups with diverse technology access and use. These findings can be generalized to many other health fields and are practical considerations for donors, investigators, reviewers, and ethics committees engaged in digital clinical trials.
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.