MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2945420460 · doi:10.2196/13049

A Smartphone Game to Prevent HIV Among Young Africans (Tumaini): Assessing Intervention and Study Acceptability Among Adolescents and Their Parents in a Randomized Controlled Trial

2019· article· en· W2945420460 sur OpenAlexvenueno aff
Gaëlle Sabben, Victor Mudhune, Ken Ondenge, Isdorah Odero, Richard Ndivo, Victor Akelo, Kate Winskell

Notice bibliographique

RevueJMIR mhealth and uhealth · 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 interventionRandomized controlled trialFocus groupUsabilityPopulationCondomIntervention (counseling)OperationalizationMedicinePsychologyApplied psychologyFamily medicineHuman immunodeficiency virus (HIV)NursingComputer scienceEnvironmental health

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Young people aged 15 to 24 years account for one-third of new adult HIV infections. Controlling the HIV epidemic requires effective interventions targeted toward young people and their needs. Smartphone games offer a promising avenue for reaching this population with evidence-based HIV prevention interventions. It is crucial to the effectiveness of these interventions that they be acceptable and intrinsically motivating to adolescents as well as acceptable to their parents. OBJECTIVE: Tumaini is a narrative-based smartphone game designed to help prevent HIV among young Africans aged 11 to 14 years by delaying first sex and increasing condom use at first sex. Following a 16-day feasibility study of Tumaini, we assessed the acceptability (1) of the intervention, where acceptability was operationalized as appeal, relevance, value, usability, and understandability, and (2) of this study and a planned future randomized controlled efficacy trial. METHODS: During the randomized feasibility study (n=60) of Tumaini in western Kenya in spring 2017, 30 participants used the intervention on a study-provided smartphone. The app automatically logged participant interaction with the game in time-stamped log files. All 30 participants completed an Audio Computer-Assisted Self-Interview-based game experience survey, and 27 took part in 4 focus group discussions (FGDs) about the game's appeal, relevance, value, usability, and understandability. Their parents (n=22) also participated in 4 FGDs about the acceptability of the intervention, of this study, and of a planned efficacy trial. Survey data were analyzed using SAS software (SAS Institute Inc); FGD transcripts were coded and analyzed in MAXQDA 12 (Verbi GmbH); and gameplay log files were analyzed using Microsoft Excel. RESULTS: Adolescent participants' survey responses indicated that Tumaini scored well with players on all indicators of acceptability (appeal, relevance, value, usability, and understandability). Focus group analyses aligned with these findings and emphasized a high degree of player engagement with the game, which was supported by log file analysis. Adolescent participants were eager for additional content, and parents were receptive to a longer study involving biomarkers, based on their positive experiences with this study. There is scope to improve communication with parents about their role in the intervention. As the game was tested in beta version, there is also scope to fine-tune some of the game mechanics to increase usability. CONCLUSIONS: This study shows the strong acceptability of an interactive smartphone-based game both to adolescents and their parents in western Kenya and that of the study methods used to pilot-test the intervention. It also suggests that longitudinal efficacy studies of this type of intervention, including those using biomarkers, have the potential to be acceptable among parents. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03054051; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03054051 (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/70U2gCNtW).

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)0,012
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesMéta-épidémiologie (sens strict)
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Observationnel · Signal consensuel: Observationnel
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,220
Score d'incertitude au seuil1,000

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0120,001
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0010,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0030,000
Bibliométrie0,0010,001
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0010,000
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,001
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0000,000

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 Opus0,038
Tête enseignante GPT0,428
Écart entre enseignants0,391 · 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'étudeObservationnel
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

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

En bref

Citations50
Publié2019
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueJMIR mhealth and uhealthMême sujetMobile Health and mHealth ApplicationsTravaux en français237 207