Question · asked by 1 review
Mobile phone text messages vs usual care: Very few events.
What each review found
Current versions only| Finding | Effect | Studies | GRADE certainty |
|---|---|---|---|
Mobile phone text messages vs standard care Very few events. · Patients with HIV infection, on ART Mobile phone text messaging for promoting adherence to antiretroviral therapy in patients with HIV infection (2012) · Cochrane Headline outcomes only | no estimate extracted | 1 participants | GRADE not reported |
Findings are shown side by side, never pooled across reviews.
The reviews
| Review | Searched up to | Included studies | AMSTAR 2 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Mobile phone text messaging for promoting adherence to antiretroviral therapy in patients with HIV infection 2012 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only | Not reported | list not extracted yet | Not assessed |
Studies behind the findings
None of these reviews ties its included studies to this outcome in the data here. Cochrane reviews and reviews with headline outcomes only do not list their studies yet.
How reviews are matched to this question
Reviews word the same question differently. Four decision models (TypeSafe's Jev, Liquid AI's d1-ultra, SubQ Snap and Baseten's Elephant) judged each wording of the population, intervention, comparator and outcome against the others; two wordings count as the same when at least three of them agree and none clearly disagrees, and findings count as this question only when all four elements match. Timing, setting and subgroup never split a question: they are shown on each finding.