ArticlePloS one2025
Health worker acceptability of an HIV testing mobile health application within a rural Zambian HIV treatment programme.
Article in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Barriers associated with the implementation, adoption, scale-up and sustainability of mHealth in Sub-Saharan Africa: a systematic review guided by the NASSS Framework.BMJ health & care informatics · 2026Pooled it
- Digital health and rural health workforce retention: mapping workforce retention pathways.European journal of public health · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAs more people living with HIV are identified and prescribed antiretroviral treatment in Zambia, detecting new HIV infections to complete the last mile of epidemic control is challenging. To address this, innovative targeted testing strategies are essential. Therefore, Right to Care Zambia developed and implemented a novel digital health surveillance application, Lynx, in three Zambian provinces-Northern, Luapula, and Muchinga in 2018. Lynx offers real-time HIV testing data with geo-spatial analysis for targeted testing, and has proven effective in enhancing HIV testing yield. This cross-sectional mixed methods study assessed the acceptability of Lynx among HIV testing healthcare workers in Zambia.
methodsA quantitative Likert scale (1-5) survey was administered to 176 healthcare workers to gauge Lynx's acceptability. Additionally, six qualitative key person interviews and five focus group discussions were conducted to gain an in-depth understanding of acceptability, and identify relevant barriers and facilitators. Quantitative data were analysed by averaging survey responses and running descriptive statistics. Qualitative data were transcribed and analysed in thematic coding. Data triangulation was utilised between the data sources to verify findings.
resultsOverall, the average survey score of perceived ease of use was 3.926 (agree), perceived usefulness was 4.179 (strongly agree) and perceived compatibility was 3.574 (agree). Survey questions related to network requirements, resource availability, and IT support had the most "strongly disagree" responses. The qualitative data collection revealed that Lynx was perceived as useful, and easy to use. Training for staff and regular updates were identified as facilitators, while conflicting work priorities and inconsistent IT support were identified barriers.
conclusionLynx was identified as acceptable by health workers due to its perceived usefulness, staff trainings, and regular updates. For a mobile health intervention to be embraced in rural Zambian settings, key facilitators include robust IT support, comprehensive training, user feedback-based updates, and consideration of facility staff priorities.
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.