Cited by 8Mobile Health and mHealth ApplicationsMedication Adherence and ComplianceTuberculosis Research and Epidemiology

A meta-analysis of technology-based interventions on treatment adherence and treatment success among TBC patients

Open access
Huda, Mega Hasanul, Rahman, Muhamad Fauzi, Zalaya, Yusuf, Mukminin, Muhammad Amirul, Purnamasari, Telly, Hendarwan, Harimat, Su’udi, Amir, Hasugian, Armedy Ronny +7 more·2024·PLOS ONE

Abstract

Various technology-based interventions have been designed to improve medication adherence and treatment success. However, research on the most effective mode to address this issue is still limited. Our study evaluated the effectiveness of technology-based interventions in improving treatment adherence, completion, and treatment success among tuberculosis (TBC) patients. We conducted a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials by searching articles from six databases including PubMed, Science Direct, Cochrane, Jstor, Embase, and Scopus from 2018 to April 2023. Two independent reviewers assessed the study quality using the Cochrane Risk of Bias 2.0 tool. We analysed the data using a random-effects model. We also conducted publication bias and sensitivity analysis. In total, 13 studies were identified and 4,794 participants were included in the meta-analysis. The results indicated that technology-based interventions were effective in improving treatment adherence, completion, and success (Odds Ratio (OR): 2.57, 95% Confident Interval (CI): 1.01–6.50, I 2 = 86.6%; OR: 1.77, 95% CI: 0.95–3.28, I 2: 82.3%; OR: 1.61, 95% CI: 0.85–3.06, I 2: 84%, respectively). We examined the possibility of publication bias in the published studies included in this systematic review. However, no evidence of publication bias was found. From the sensitivity analysis by removing one study randomly, we found that our results are robust. Based on the results, we can conclude that technology-based interventions like MERM, text-based messages, video conferencing, and VOT are effective in increasing treatment adherence and completion in tuberculosis management. Therefore, technology shows immense potential in enhancing patient outcomes.

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 · 10.1371/journal.pone.0312001

Cites

43 of 43 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?

  • In the context of digital mental health interventions, users with higher SE are more likely to approach technology-based treatment with confidence and persistence.

    “In the context of digital mental health interventions, users with higher SE are more likely to approach technology-based treatment with confidence and persistence [56].”

    From Advancing Undergraduate Student Mental Healthcare of Social Anxiety Disorder: Evaluating the Acceptance of AR-Assisted Cognitive Behavioral Therapy Through TAM-Based Constructs. (2026) · cites this paper as [56]

    The Results and Conclusions address technology-based interventions for tuberculosis treatment, not digital mental health interventions. The Discussion says intrinsically motivated people may persist in tasks, but it does not address whether higher self-efficacy (SE) predicts confidence or persistence with technology-based treatment. Searches for self-efficacy, confidence, and mental health found no passage establishing the claim. (LLM, conf=0.76)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

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

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Huda, M. H., Rahman, M. F., Zalaya, Y., Mukminin, M. A., Purnamasari, T., Hendarwan, H., Su’udi, A., Hasugian, A. R., Yuniar, Y., Handayani, R. S., Putranto, R. H., Yulianto, A., Suryatma, A., Despitasari, M., & Siregar, R. N.
Affiliations
  • University of Indonesia (ID)
  • Taipei Medical University (TW)
  • National Research and Innovation Agency (ID)
Corresponding author
Huda, Mega Hasanul
Venue
PLOS ONE
Published
2024-12-02
Volume
19
Issue
12
Pages
e0312001
ISSN
1932-6203 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4404918251
Cited by
8
References
43
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 7
FWCI
0.72
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • PLoS ONE (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Funders
Badan Riset dan Inovasi Nasional
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Mobile Health and mHealth Applications
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Family Practice › Medication Adherence and Compliance
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Infectious Diseases › Tuberculosis Research and Epidemiology
Keywords
tuberculosis, technology-based interventions, medication adherence, treatment completion, treatment success, mobile health, text messaging, videoconferencing, digital health
MeSH terms
Antitubercular Agents, Humans, Tuberculosis, Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic, Treatment Outcome, Telemedicine, Medication Adherence, Text Messaging

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