MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4372336616 · doi:10.2196/42952

Behavioral Predictors of Intention to Use a Text Messaging Reminder System Among People Living With HIV in Rural Uganda: Survey Study

2023· article· en· W4372336616 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Jeffrey I. Campbell, Isaac Aturinda, Evans Mwesigwa, Annabella Habinka, Michael Kanyesigye, Richard J. Holden, Mark J. Siedner, John D. Kraemer

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Human Factors · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicMobile Health and mHealth Applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Heart, Lung, and Blood InstituteNational Institute of Mental HealthAgency for Healthcare Research and QualityNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsmHealthShort Message ServicePsychological interventionText messagingUnified theory of acceptance and use of technologyText messageIntervention (counseling)PsychologyBehavior changeTheory of planned behavioreHealthMedicineInternet privacyHealth careSocial influenceNursingSocial psychologyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The expansion of cellular phones in sub-Saharan Africa spurred the development of SMS text message-based mobile health (mHealth) technology. Numerous SMS text message-based interventions have attempted to increase retention in care for people living with HIV in sub-Saharan Africa. Many of these interventions have failed to scale. Understanding theory-grounded factors leading to mHealth acceptability is needed to create scalable, contextually appropriate, and user-focused interventions to improve longitudinal HIV care for people living with HIV in sub-Saharan Africa. OBJECTIVE: In this study, we aimed to understand the relationship between constructs from the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT), constructs identified in previous qualitative research, and behavioral intention to use a novel SMS text message-based mHealth intervention designed to improve care retention among people living with HIV initiating treatment in rural Uganda. METHODS: We conducted a survey of people living with HIV who were newly initiating HIV care in Mbarara, Uganda, and had agreed to use a novel SMS text message-based system that notified them of abnormal laboratory results and reminded them to return to the clinic. Survey items assessed behavioral intention to use the SMS text messaging system; constructs from UTAUT; and demographics, literacy, SMS text messaging experience, HIV status disclosure, and social support. We used factor analysis and logistic regression to estimate the relationships between UTAUT constructs and the behavioral intention to use the SMS text messaging system. RESULTS: A total of 249 participants completed the surveys, of whom 115 (46.2%) expressed high behavioral intention to use the SMS text messaging intervention. In a multivariable analysis, we found that performance expectancy (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] of the scaled factor score 5.69, 95% CI 2.64-12.25; P<.001), effort expectancy (aOR of the scaled factor score 4.87, 95% CI 1.75-13.51; P=.002), and social influence (measured as a 1-unit Likert score increase in the perception that clinical staff have been helpful in the use of the SMS text messaging program; aOR 3.03, 95% CI 1.21-7.54; P=.02) were significantly associated with high behavioral intention to use the SMS text messaging program. SMS text messaging experience (aOR/1-unit increase 1.48, 95% CI 1.11-1.96; P=.008) and age (aOR/1-year increase 1.07, 95% CI 1.03-1.13; P=.003) were also significantly associated with increased odds of high intention to use the system. CONCLUSIONS: Performance expectancy, effort expectancy, and social influence, as well as age and SMS experience, were drivers of high behavioral intention to use an SMS text messaging reminder system among people living with HIV initiating treatment in rural Uganda. These findings highlight salient factors associated with SMS intervention acceptability in this population and indicate attributes that are likely to be key to the successful development and scaling of novel mHealth interventions.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.083
GPT teacher head0.420
Teacher spread0.337 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Human FactorsSame topicMobile Health and mHealth ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207