Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39412842›Full record

ArticleJMIR formative research2024

WhatsApp Versus SMS for 2-Way, Text-Based Follow-Up After Voluntary Medical Male Circumcision in South Africa: Exploration of Messaging Platform Choice.

Isabella Fabens, Calsile Makhele, Nelson Kibiribiri Igaba, Sizwe Hlongwane, Motshana Phohole, Evelyn Waweru, Femi Oni, Madalitso Khwepeya, Maria Sardini, Khumbulani Moyo and 7 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR formative research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing 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

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Evaluation of post-discharge follow-up and clinical outcomes in patientsRevista de la Facultad de Ciencias Medicas (Cordoba, Argentina) · 2025
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Observational
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

17 authors.

Isabella FabensInternational Training and Education Center for Health (I-TECH), Departments of Global Health and Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, United States.ORCID 0009-0002-8135-9965
Calsile MakheleAurum Institute, Johannesburg, South Africa.ORCID 0009-0009-5647-7901
Nelson Kibiribiri IgabaRight to Care, Johannesburg, South Africa.ORCID 0009-0002-3199-2324
Sizwe HlongwaneRight to Care, Johannesburg, South Africa.ORCID 0009-0008-2350-3993
Motshana PhoholeRight to Care, Johannesburg, South Africa.ORCID 0009-0004-4027-8477
Evelyn WaweruMedic, Nairobi, Kenya.ORCID 0000-0002-4599-8973
Femi OniMedic, Nairobi, Kenya.ORCID 0009-0007-1045-9092
Madalitso KhwepeyaInternational Training and Education Center for Health (I-TECH), Departments of Global Health and Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, United States.ORCID 0000-0003-4551-338X
Maria SardiniAurum Institute, Johannesburg, South Africa.ORCID 0009-0000-1170-6373
Khumbulani MoyoRight to Care, Johannesburg, South Africa.ORCID 0009-0002-7213-2187
Hannock TweyaInternational Training and Education Center for Health (I-TECH), Departments of Global Health and Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, United States.ORCID 0000-0002-8247-1273
Mourice Barasa WafulaMedic, Nairobi, Kenya.ORCID 0000-0001-8599-3168
Jacqueline PienaarAurum Institute, Johannesburg, South Africa.ORCID 0000-0002-6252-4534
Felex NdebeleAurum Institute, Johannesburg, South Africa.ORCID 0000-0002-7499-7486
Geoffrey SetsweAurum Institute, Johannesburg, South Africa.ORCID 0000-0003-3646-0722
Tracy Qi DongFred Hutchinson Cancer Center, Seattle, WA, United States.ORCID 0000-0001-6769-608X
Caryl FeldackerInternational Training and Education Center for Health (I-TECH), Departments of Global Health and Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, United States.ORCID 0000-0002-8152-6754

Funding

University of Washington/Fred Hutch Center for AIDS ResearchP30AI027757 · NIAID · UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON · PI MARI M KITAHATA · 1988 to 2026
$104.9M
Expanding and Scaling Two-way Texting to Reduce Unnecessary Follow-Up and Improve Adverse Event Identification Among Voluntary Medical Male Circumcision Clients in the Republic of South AfricaR01NR019229 · NINR · UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON · PI FELDACKER, CARYL, SETSWE, GEOFFREY KEITSHEPILE · 2020 to 2024
$2.8M
NIAID NIH HHS P30 AI027757NINR NIH HHS R01 NR019229
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTelehealth is growing, especially in areas where access to health facilities is difficult. We previously used 2-way texting (2wT) via SMS to improve the quality of postoperative care after voluntary medical male circumcision in South Africa. In this study, we offered males aged 15 years and older WhatsApp or SMS as their message delivery and interaction platform to explore user preferences and behaviors.

objectiveThe objectives of this process evaluation embedded within a larger 2wT expansion trial were to (1) explore 2wT client preferences, including client satisfaction, with WhatsApp or SMS; (2) examine response rates (participation) by SMS and WhatsApp; and (3) gather feedback from the 2wT implementation team on the WhatsApp approach.

methodsMales aged 15 years and older undergoing voluntary medical male circumcision in program sites could choose their follow-up approach, selecting 2wT via SMS or WhatsApp or routine care (in-person postoperative visits). The 2wT system provided 1-way educational messages and an open 2-way communication channel between providers and clients. We analyzed quantitative data from the 2wT database on message delivery platforms (WhatsApp vs SMS), response rates, and user behaviors using chi-square tests, z tests, and t tests. The team conducted short phone calls with WhatsApp and SMS clients about their perceptions of this 2wT platform using a short, structured interview guide. We consider informal reflections from the technical team members on the use of WhatsApp. We applied an implementation science lens using the RE-AIM (reach, effectiveness, adoption, implementation, and maintenance) framework to focus results on practice and policy improvement.

resultsOver a 2-month period-from August to October, 2023-337 males enrolled in 2wT and were offered WhatsApp or SMS and were included in the analysis. For 2wT reach, 177 (53%) participants chose WhatsApp as their platform (P=.38). Mean client age was 30 years, and 253 (75%) participants chose English for automated messages. From quality assurance calls, almost all respondents (87/89, 98%) were happy with the way they were followed up. For effectiveness, on average for the days on which responses were requested, 58 (33%) WhatsApp clients and 44 (28%) SMS clients responded (P=.50). All 2wT team members believed WhatsApp limited the automated message content, language choices, and inclusivity as compared with the SMS-based 2wT approach.

conclusionsWhen presented with a choice of 2wT communication platform, clients appear evenly split between SMS and WhatsApp. However, WhatsApp requires a smartphone and data plan, potentially reducing reach at scale. Clients using both platforms responded to 2wT interactive prompts, demonstrating similar effectiveness in engaging clients in follow-up. For telehealth interventions, digital health designers should maintain an SMS-based platform and carefully consider adding WhatsApp as an option for clients, using an implementation science approach to present evidence that guides the best implementation approach for their setting.

Indexed as

Circumcision, MaleMobile ApplicationsText MessagingAdolescentAdultAftercareHumansMaleMiddle AgedPatient SatisfactionSouth AfricaTelemedicineYoung Adult2-way textingdigital health innovationsmale circumcisionquality improvementSouth Africatext messagesWhatsApp

Identifiers

PMID39412842
PMCPMC11525085

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.