↓ Skip to main content

Design of a randomized trial to evaluate the influence of mobile phone reminders on adherence to first line antiretroviral treatment in South India - the HIVIND study protocol

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Medical Research Methodology, March 2010
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (65th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
6 X users

Readers on

mendeley
240 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Design of a randomized trial to evaluate the influence of mobile phone reminders on adherence to first line antiretroviral treatment in South India - the HIVIND study protocol
Published in
BMC Medical Research Methodology, March 2010
DOI 10.1186/1471-2288-10-25
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ayesha De Costa, Anita Shet, Nagalingeswaran Kumarasamy, Per Ashorn, Bo Eriksson, Lennart Bogg, Vinod K Diwan, the HIVIND study team

Abstract

Poor adherence to antiretroviral treatment has been a public health challenge associated with the treatment of HIV. Although different adherence-supporting interventions have been reported, their long term feasibility in low income settings remains uncertain. Thus, there is a need to explore sustainable contextual adherence aids in such settings, and to test these using rigorous scientific designs. The current ubiquity of mobile phones in many resource-constrained settings, make it a contextually appropriate and relatively low cost means of supporting adherence. In India, mobile phones have wide usage and acceptability and are potentially feasible tools for enhancing adherence to medications. This paper presents the study protocol for a trial, to evaluate the influence of mobile phone reminders on adherence to first-line antiretroviral treatment in South India.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 240 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 4 2%
Brazil 2 <1%
United Kingdom 2 <1%
Canada 2 <1%
South Africa 1 <1%
Australia 1 <1%
Sweden 1 <1%
Unknown 227 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 44 18%
Student > Master 44 18%
Student > Ph. D. Student 40 17%
Student > Bachelor 17 7%
Other 13 5%
Other 42 18%
Unknown 40 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 80 33%
Social Sciences 23 10%
Nursing and Health Professions 20 8%
Psychology 19 8%
Computer Science 15 6%
Other 37 15%
Unknown 46 19%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 27 January 2015.
All research outputs
#6,599,307
of 23,342,092 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Research Methodology
#995
of 2,059 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#30,742
of 96,035 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Research Methodology
#7
of 11 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,342,092 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 70th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,059 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 50% 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 96,035 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 65% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 11 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.