SynthesisJMIR mHealth and uHealth2024
mHealth-Based Gamification Interventions Among Men Who Have Sex With Men in the HIV Prevention and Care Continuum: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Synthesis in JMIR mHealth and uHealth, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Impact of mHealth on enhancing pre-exposure prophylaxis adherence and strengthening the HIV prevention cascade among key populations: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in public health · 2025Pooled it
- Developing a Novel Mobile App to Support HIV Testing and Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis Uptake Among Men Who Have Sex With Men: Formative and Technical Pilot Study.JMIR human factors · 2025Trial
- Designing a Gamified mHealth App for HIV Prevention and Comorbidities Among Malaysian Young Men Who Have Sex With Men: An Interdisciplinary Expert Panel Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
- mHealth-Based Gamification Interventions to Promote Health Among Older Adults: Scoping Review.JMIR mHealth and uHealth · 2026Article
- "O for KP": an evidence review on recentering HIV prevention and PrEP delivery for key populations and the underserved.Current opinion in infectious diseases · 2026Review
- Factors associated with one-night stands among men who have sex with men recruited via the internet: a cross-sectional survey in China.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- Preferences for eHealth interventions to improve sexual health and prevent HIV for Vietnamese young men who have sex with men.Health promotion international · 2025Article
- Preliminary evaluation of a gamified smartphone intervention (O2O-PEP) for enhancing HIV post-exposure prophylaxis uptake in men who have sex with men: pilot feasibility study.BMC public health · 2025Article
- Article
- Factors associated with commercial sexual activities among students engaging in casual heterosexual behaviors: a cross-sectional study in Zhejiang Province.Frontiers in public health · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: In the past few years, a burgeoning interest has emerged in applying gamification to promote desired health behaviors. However, little is known about the effectiveness of such applications in the HIV prevention and care continuum among men who have sex with men (MSM). Objective: This study aims to summarize and evaluate research on the effectiveness of gamification on the HIV prevention and care continuum, including HIV-testing promotion; condomless anal sex (CAS) reduction; and uptake of and adherence to pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP), postexposure prophylaxis (PEP), and antiretroviral therapy (ART). Methods: We comprehensively searched PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library, Web of Science, Scopus, and the Journal of Medical Internet Research and its sister journals for studies published in English and Chinese from inception to January 2024. Eligible studies were included when they used gamified interventions with an active or inactive control group and assessed at least one of the following outcomes: HIV testing; CAS; and uptake of and adherence to PrEP, PEP, and ART. During the meta-analysis, a random-effects model was applied. Two reviewers independently assessed the quality and risk of bias of each included study. Results: The systematic review identified 26 studies, including 10 randomized controlled trials (RCTs). The results indicated that gamified digital interventions had been applied to various HIV outcomes, such as HIV testing, CAS, PrEP uptake and adherence, PEP uptake, and ART adherence. Most of the studies were conducted in the United States (n=19, 73%). The most frequently used game component was gaining points, followed by challenges. The meta-analysis showed gamification interventions could reduce the number of CAS acts at the 3-month follow-up (n=2 RCTs; incidence rate ratio 0.62, 95% CI 0.44-0.88). The meta-analysis also suggested an effective but nonstatistically significant effect of PrEP adherence at the 3-month follow-up (n=3 RCTs; risk ratio 1.16, 95% CI 0.96-1.38) and 6-month follow-up (n=4 RCTs; risk ratio 1.28, 95% CI 0.89-1.84). Only 1 pilot RCT was designed to evaluate the effectiveness of a gamified app in promoting HIV testing and PrEP uptake. No RCT was conducted to evaluate the effect of the gamified digital intervention on PEP uptake and adherence, and ART initiation among MSM. Conclusions: Our findings suggest the short-term effect of gamified digital interventions on lowering the number of CAS acts in MSM. Further well-powered studies are still needed to evaluate the effect of the gamified digital intervention on HIV testing, PrEP uptake, PEP initiation and adherence, and ART initiation in MSM.
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.