| Title |
Impact of a mHealth Intervention for Peer Health Workers on AIDS Care in Rural Uganda: A Mixed Methods Evaluation of a Cluster-Randomized Trial
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
AIDS and Behavior, July 2011
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s10461-011-9995-x |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Larry W. Chang, Joseph Kagaayi, Hannah Arem, Gertrude Nakigozi, Victor Ssempijja, David Serwadda, Thomas C. Quinn, Ronald H. Gray, Robert C. Bollinger, Steven J. Reynolds |
| Abstract |
Mobile phone access in low and middle-income countries is rapidly expanding and offers an opportunity to leverage limited human resources for health. We conducted a mixed methods evaluation of a cluster-randomized trial exploratory substudy on the impact of a mHealth (mobile phone) support intervention used by community-based peer health workers (PHW) on AIDS care in rural Uganda. 29 PHWs at 10 clinics were randomized by clinic to receive the intervention or not. PHWs used phones to call and text higher level providers with patient-specific clinical information. 970 patients cared for by the PHWs were followed over a 26 month period. No significant differences were found in patients' risk of virologic failure. Qualitative analyses found improvements in patient care and logistics and broad support for the mHealth intervention among patients, clinic staff, and PHWs. Key challenges identified included variable patient phone access, privacy concerns, and phone maintenance. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 3 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 373 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 6 | 2% |
| United States | 5 | 1% |
| South Africa | 2 | <1% |
| Germany | 1 | <1% |
| Sweden | 1 | <1% |
| Philippines | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 357 | 96% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 94 | 25% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 62 | 17% |
| Researcher | 60 | 16% |
| Student > Bachelor | 26 | 7% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 22 | 6% |
| Other | 63 | 17% |
| Unknown | 46 | 12% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 91 | 24% |
| Social Sciences | 64 | 17% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 35 | 9% |
| Computer Science | 33 | 9% |
| Psychology | 18 | 5% |
| Other | 64 | 17% |
| Unknown | 68 | 18% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 20. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 29 August 2019.
All research outputs
#1,665,446
of 23,849,058 outputs
Outputs from AIDS and Behavior
#197
of 3,566 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#7,308
of 118,271 outputs
Outputs of similar age from AIDS and Behavior
#2
of 33 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,849,058 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,566 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.0. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 118,271 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 33 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its contemporaries.