↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Considerations in using text messages to improve adherence to highly active antiretroviral therapy: a qualitative study among clients in Yaoundé, Cameroon

Overview of attention for article published in HIV/AIDS (Auckland, N.Z.), April 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users
video
1 YouTube creator

Citations

dimensions_citation
36 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
80 Mendeley
Title
Considerations in using text messages to improve adherence to highly active antiretroviral therapy: a qualitative study among clients in Yaoundé, Cameroon
Published in
HIV/AIDS (Auckland, N.Z.), April 2012
DOI 10.2147/hiv.s29954
Pubmed ID
Authors

Lawrence Mbuagbaw, Renée Cécile Bonono-Momnougui, Lehana Thabane

Abstract

Poor adherence to highly active antiretroviral therapy (HAART) is a major hindrance to the reduction of mortality and morbidity due to HIV. This qualitative study used focus groups to explore the views and experiences of HIV patients on HAART with adherence reminders, especially the text message (SMS [short message service]). The ethnographic data obtained were used to design a clinical trial to assess the effect of motivational text messages versus usual care to enhance adherence to HAART among HIV patients in Yaoundé, Cameroon. Participants appreciated the idea of a timely SMS reminder, and cited the physician as a role model. They expressed concerns about privacy. Long-term life goals were a motivating factor to adhere. Overall, text messaging was viewed positively as a tool with a dual function of reminder and motivator. Messages coming from the attending physician may have a stronger impact. Trials investigating the use of text messages to improve adherence to HAART need to consider the content and timing of SMS, taking into account technical challenges and privacy.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 80 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Sweden 1 1%
Nigeria 1 1%
Unknown 78 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 17 21%
Researcher 16 20%
Student > Doctoral Student 7 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 9%
Student > Bachelor 6 8%
Other 12 15%
Unknown 15 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 34 43%
Social Sciences 5 6%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 6%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 5%
Computer Science 3 4%
Other 11 14%
Unknown 18 23%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 06 June 2012.
All research outputs
#16,047,334
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from HIV/AIDS (Auckland, N.Z.)
#147
of 330 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#104,792
of 173,053 outputs
Outputs of similar age from HIV/AIDS (Auckland, N.Z.)
#3
of 6 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 330 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 50% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 173,053 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 6 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 3 of them.