ArticleMalawi medical journal : the journal of Medical Association of Malawi2025
A Comparative Analysis of Physical and Mobile Phone Tracing in Clinical Trials in Lilongwe, Malawi.
Article in Malawi medical journal : the journal of Medical Association of Malawi, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Background: Patient retention is important for proper adherence to clinical trial protocols. Mobile-phone and physical tracing have been implemented at clinics across Malawi to improve retention but tracing effectiveness and attitudes towards tracing have not been sufficiently studied. Methods: In a site-specific phone retention pilot study embedded within the HIV Prevention Trials Network (HPTN) 052 study in Lilongwe, Malawi, all tracing records and additional semi-structured questionnaires from 50 participants were used to obtain attitudes towards tracing efforts and methods. During a retrospective evaluation study at UNC Project, over 20,000 tracing records were analyzed across 49 studies from 2011 to 2019. Success in reaching participants, bringing participants to clinic, and overall tracing costs were analyzed. Results: In the phone retention pilot study, 47 participants (94%) had positive attitudes towards tracing and 41 (82%) preferred mobile-phone tracing. Of all tracing attempts in the phone retention pilot study, mobile-phone tracing (232/309, 75%) was more successful than physical tracing (147/244, 60%) in reaching patients, and the cost of mobile-phone tracing was less ($4.21 versus $36.63 per tracing attempt). During the retrospective study period, mobile-phone tracing (7808/9522, 82%) was more successful than physical tracing (7742/10606, 73%) in returning patients to the clinic. Mobile-phone tracing saved approximately $32.08 and 92 minutes per tracing attempt. Conclusion: Mobile-phone tracing is acceptable, feasible, and efficient for clinical trials in Lilongwe, Malawi. Mobile-phone tracing can be used to strengthen patient engagement and improve collection of primary-outcome data for 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.