Cited by 26Mobile Health and mHealth ApplicationsHIV/AIDS Research and InterventionsICT in Developing Communities

A Missing Link: HIV-/AIDS-Related mHealth Interventions for Health Workers in Low- and Middle-Income Countries

Open access
Gimbel, Sarah, Kawakyu, Nami, Dau, Hallie, Unger, Jennifer A.·2018·Current HIV/AIDS Reports

Abstract

Purpose of review Through a review of the peer-reviewed and gray literature on HIV mobile health (mHealth) tools for health workers and in-depth interviews with mHealth leaders in the field, we provide a synthesis of current work and propose mHealth research priorities for HIV prevention, care, and treatment.Recent findings Significant investment in implementation research and bringing together researchers capable of identifying drivers of successful implementation and industry leaders capable of bringing efficacious tools to scale are needed to move this area forward. Effective and appropriate technologies to support health systems in the prevention and treatment of HIV/AIDS in low- and middle-income countries are needed to improve the efficiency and quality of health service delivery and ultimately improve health outcomes. Although a growing number of HIV mHealth tools have been developed to support health workers, few of these tools have been rigorously evaluated and even fewer have been brought to scale.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s11904-018-0416-x

Cites

30 of 30 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. [21]Gimbel S, Nduati R, Kawakyu N, Coutinho J, Zunt A, Aburri N, Usability and feasibility of a provider decision support smartphone application for frontline health workers in Kenya and Mozambique. Fifth Global Symposium on Health Systems Research Abstract 2143. October 8–12, 2018 Liverpool, UK

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Gimbel, S., Kawakyu, N., Dau, H., & Unger, J. A.
Affiliations
University of Washington (US)
Corresponding author
Gimbel, Sarah
Venue
Current HIV/AIDS Reports
Published
2018-09-26
Volume
15
Issue
6
Pages
414-422
ISSN
  • 1548-3568 (ISSN-L)
  • 1548-3576
OpenAlex
W2893093802
Cited by
26
References
30
Citations by year
2025: 2 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 4
FWCI
0.36
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Current HIV/AIDS Reports (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (R21AI124399)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Mobile Health and mHealth Applications
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Infectious Diseases › HIV/AIDS Research and Interventions
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › ICT in Developing Communities
Keywords
mobile health intervention, healthcare workers, HIV prevention, HIV care and treatment, low- and middle-income countries, implementation research, health care delivery, research priorities
MeSH terms
Community Health Workers, Delivery of Health Care, Developing Countries, HIV, Humans, HIV Infections, Telemedicine

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review