Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41211019›Full record

ArticlemHealth2025

A mobile health-based alcohol reduction intervention and its usability among persons with Human Immunodeficiency Virus in Uganda.

Julian Adong, Robin Fatch, Naomi Sanyu, Anita Katusiime, Nneka I Emenyonu, Winnie R Muyindike, Judith A Hahn

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in mHealth, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

7 authors.

Julian AdongDepartment of Pediatrics and Child Health, Faculty of Medicine, Mbarara University of Science and Technology, Mbarara, Uganda.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9314-5257
Robin FatchDepartment of Medicine, University of California, San Francisco, CA, USA.
Naomi SanyuGlobal Health Collaborative, Mbarara University of Science and Technology, Mbarara, Uganda.
Anita KatusiimeGlobal Health Collaborative, Mbarara University of Science and Technology, Mbarara, Uganda.
Nneka I EmenyonuDepartment of Medicine, University of California, San Francisco, CA, USA.
Winnie R MuyindikeHIV Clinic, Mbarara Regional Referral Hospital, Mbarara, Uganda.
Judith A HahnDepartment of Medicine, University of California, San Francisco, CA, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV) and alcohol use are widespread in sub-Saharan Africa (sSA), negatively impacting the continuum of HIV care, from prevention and testing to treatment outcomes. Reducing alcohol consumption among people with HIV (PWH) is therefore a public health priority. Most alcohol reduction strategies require in-person interactions and can be challenging during pandemics and social unrest, which are common in sSA. Mobile Health (mHealth) interventions may offer a more accessible reduction counselling, an accessible alternative to, or may augment, in-person interventions. However, the usability of these mHealth interventions in the target population should be assessed before implementation. This analysis evaluates usability of an mHealth intervention (automated booster sessions) to augment in-person alcohol use reduction counselling and examines its association with booster intervention uptake among PWH who self-reported unhealthy alcohol use. Methods: We analyzed data from PWH who participated in an alcohol reduction counselling intervention. Participants were PWH who self-reported unhealthy alcohol use in the prior 3 months by the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test-Consumption (AUDIT-C positive; ≥3 women, ≥4 men). We analyzed data from one of the intervention arms, called the technology booster study arm. In this arm, participants received an in-person counselling intervention that was augmented by technology-based boosters delivered over 3 months. These boosters were delivered via interactive voice response (IVR) or short message service (SMS) text messages, based on participant preference. Usability of the IVR and SMS sessions was assessed at 6 months using the Systems Usability Scale (SUS). Booster intervention uptake, the outcome variable for this analysis, was defined as the percentage of booster sessions during the intervention period in which the participant successfully entered a personal identification number (PIN) needed to start the session. Multivariable linear regression (adjusting for sex, age, being literate, social desirability, and baseline high-risk alcohol use) was conducted to examine the relationship between usability and booster intervention uptake. Results: Of the 86 participants randomized to the technology arm, 35% were female, with a median age of 40 years [interquartile range (IQR): 32-47]. Fifty-six (65%) chose to receive IVR calls, while 30 (35%) chose SMS; the median booster intervention uptake was 73% (IQR: 53-83). The median SUS score (out of 100) was 90 (IQR: 85-90). SUS score and being literate were associated with booster intervention uptake [adjusted β =0.65, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.02-1.29, P=0.04, and β =21.33, 95% CI: 7.65-35.01, reduction counselling, an 0.01, respectively]. Conclusions: In this analysis of usability and booster intervention uptake among PWH using an mHealth-augmented alcohol reduction intervention, usability was associated with increased booster intervention uptake, as was literacy. Understanding the usability aspects of an mHealth intervention and the level of literacy in each unique population may be predictive of intervention uptake rates.

Indexed as

Africaalcohol useHuman Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV)mobile health (mHealth)usability

Identifiers

PMID41211019
PMCPMC12594019

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.