MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2924292358 · doi:10.2196/11209

A Smartphone Game to Prevent HIV Among Young Africans: Protocol for a Randomized Pilot Study of a Mobile Intervention

2019· article· en· W2924292358 sur OpenAlexvenueno aff
Gaëlle Sabben, Victor Akelo, Victor Mudhune, Ken Ondenge, Richard Ndivo, Rob Stephenson, Kate Winskell

Notice bibliographique

RevueJMIR Research Protocols · 2019
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineHealth Professions
ThématiqueMobile Health and mHealth Applications
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesNational Institute of Mental HealthNational Institutes of HealthCenter for AIDS Research, University of WashingtonEmory UniversityNational Institute of Allergy and Infectious DiseasesAndrew W. Mellon Foundation
Mots-clésPsychological interventionIntervention (counseling)PopulationAttritionRandomized controlled trialMedicineFocus groupmHealthYoung adultFamily medicineGerontologyPhysical therapyPsychologyNursingEnvironmental health

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Young people aged under 25 years make up an increasing proportion of the population in emerging economies such as Kenya, where half of new adult HIV infections are among 15- to 24-year olds. Interventions targeting this age group have the potential to avert HIV infections among an increasingly large at-risk population. Interactive communication technologies offer a promising platform for reaching young people in engaging ways. OBJECTIVE: Tumaini is a narrative-based smartphone game designed to help young Africans protect themselves from HIV. The objective of this study was to pilot test the game, focusing on the data needed to inform a future randomized controlled efficacy trial, including assessments of study feasibility and safety. METHODS: The study took place in Kisumu Town, western Kenya, in spring 2017. The game-based intervention was pilot tested for 16 days with a sample of 60 preadolescents aged 11 to 14 years. Participant recruitment was initiated through schools. Participants were randomly assigned to the control or intervention arms of the study. One parent for each of the intervention arm participants was also recruited (n=30). The intervention arm participants were provided with smartphones on which Tumaini was loaded so that they could play the game at home. Youth completed behavioral surveys at baseline, posttest, and 6-week follow-up. The intervention arm participants provided quantitative feedback on their experience of the game-based intervention at posttest. They and their parents further participated in postintervention focus group discussions. Feasibility-related study metrics were collected on recruitment, enrollment, attrition, safety of participants, and return of phones. RESULTS: Recruitment and enrollment of the 60 preadolescents and parents were successfully completed within 18 days. No participants were lost to follow-up: all youth completed all 3 waves of the survey and 27 intervention arm youth and 22 parents and caregivers participated in the focus groups. No safety concerns were reported. All phones were returned after the intervention period; none were damaged or lost. All intervention arm participants initiated gameplay, recording a mean exposure time just under 27 hours. CONCLUSIONS: Findings indicate that it is feasible and safe to test a smartphone-based HIV prevention intervention for very young adolescents in urban and peri-urban sub-Saharan Africa by initiating recruitment in schools and temporarily providing youth participants with smartphones on which the game is loaded. A randomized controlled trial powered to assess the efficacy of the game-based intervention is being designed to be carried out in the same geographic area as the pilot, using similar methods. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03054051; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03054051 (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/6wjwpX8Bg.). INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/11209.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,015
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesCharge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Essai randomisé · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Protocole · Signal consensuel: Protocole
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,355
Score d'incertitude au seuil1,000

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0150,001
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0010,000
Bibliométrie0,0010,001
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0010,000
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0010,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,001
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0010,001

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,253
Tête enseignante GPT0,629
Écart entre enseignants0,376 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Devis d'étudeEssai randomisé
Domainenon disponible
GenreProtocole

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations27
Publié2019
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueJMIR Research ProtocolsMême sujetMobile Health and mHealth ApplicationsTravaux en français237 207