Skip to main content
PLOS One logoLink to PLOS One
. 2026 May 29;21(5):e0350279. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0350279

Adapting a medication adherence app for adolescents and young adults in Makurdi, Benue State: The Lu Dedoo Project

Olaposi Joseph Olatoregun 1,2,*,#, Lisa Hightow-Weidman 3,#, Marta Mulawa 4,#, Lauren Jennings 2,‡, Jay Osi Samuels 1,‡, Prosper Okonkwo 1,‡, Catherine Orrell 2,#
Editor: Ibrahim Jahun5
PMCID: PMC13221014  PMID: 42213746

Abstract

Introduction

Adolescents and young adults living with HIV (AYALHIV) face persistent challenges with antiretroviral therapy (ART) adherence, a key determinant of viral suppression and long-term health outcomes. The Lu Dedoo Project sought to adapt the existing (Masakhane Siphucule Impilo Yethu (MASI) adherence app, originally developed for South Africa, for AYALHIV in Benue State, Nigeria. Guided by a human-centered design (HCD) framework, the project engaged end users to ensure that the app was contextually relevant, user-friendly, and responsive to local needs prior to pilot testing.

Methods

Beta testing was conducted where purposively selected AYALHIV used MASI in its existing form for one month. Three subsequent FGDs were held among beta testers, involving a total of 22 participants: one mixed-gender adolescent group aged 15–19 years (n = 6), one male young adult group aged 20–24 years (n = 8), and one female young adult group aged 20–24 years (n = 8). FGDs were analysed using thematic analysis in NVivo® v15. Transcripts were analysed thematically to identify user experiences and desired modifications. Identified features were then prioritised using the MoSCoW method (“Must have,” “Should have,” “Could have,” “Won’t have”) to guide development decisions and ensure feasible, user-driven adaptation.

Results

Participants found the app highly engaging and liked the games, quizzes, and the ability to earn badges. These features contributed to user retention and supported their medication adherence. A subset of participants noted the challenge of needing cellular data access to use the app. “Must have” priorities included offline access to key features, simplified navigation, and customizable medication reminders. “Should have” and “Could have” priorities included adding more engaging media content and enhancing personalised reminders to better meet user needs.

Conclusions

Applying an HCD framework, complemented by MoSCoW prioritisation, provided a structured and participatory pathway for adapting an mHealth adherence app to the Nigerian context. The process ensured that core user needs guided technical decisions and that limited development resources were directed toward high-impact features. The adapted Lu Dedoo app reflects local preferences for functionality, language, and offline usability, and represents a promising, context-specific tool for improving ART adherence among AYALHIV.

Introduction

Adolescents and young adults living with HIV (AYALHIV) face persistent challenges with adherence to antiretroviral therapy (ART), resulting in increased risks of virologic failure, drug resistance, and poor health outcomes [1]. These challenges are especially pronounced in sub-Saharan Africa, where structural barriers such as stigma, limited psychosocial support, socioeconomic barriers such as low income, employment status, and health systems factors such as stockout of medical supplies and unavailability of trained healthcare personnel, compound individual and social vulnerabilities [1–4].

In Nigeria, Benue State is noted for having one of the highest HIV prevalence rates in the country at 4.9% [5]. Adolescents and young adults in this state constitute a priority demographic for intervention, as they represent approximately 60% of the population and exhibit the highest HIV prevalence. [5,6].

Mobile health (mHealth) technologies have emerged as promising tools for promoting ART adherence, especially among youth who increasingly rely on smartphones for communication and daily tasks [7]. The proliferation of affordable smartphones and the expansion of mobile internet coverage across sub-Saharan Africa have created unprecedented opportunities to deliver health interventions directly into the hands of end users. In the context of HIV care, mHealth applications offer a versatile platform to address the multifactorial barriers to adherence by combining behavioural support with real-time monitoring and personalized feedback. Evidence from populations in low- and middle-income countries demonstrates that well-designed mHealth apps can improve medication adherence by incorporating features such as medication reminders, symptom tracking, peer support networks, educational content, gamification elements, and real-time adherence tracking linked to clinic databases [8,9].

In addition, mHealth applications have shown feasibility and acceptability in similar populations by offering features such as medication reminders, peer support, gamification, and real-time adherence tracking [10]. In particular, co-designing digital interventions with input from the end-users, adolescents and healthcare workers, enhances app relevance, usability, and uptake, especially in low-resource settings [11]. This participatory approach, often described as human-centered design (HCD), ensures that apps are not only technically functional but also socially acceptable, linguistically appropriate, and responsive to contextual constraints such as internet costs, stigma, and privacy concerns [12].

The Masakhane Siphucule Impilo Yethu (MASI) application, originally developed in South Africa and adapted from the HealthMpowerment app and platform, is a smartphone app designed to support ART adherence in AYALHIV.

The MASI app includes interactive features such as adherence reminders, health education content, discussion forums, and personal tracking tools. Early evaluations of MASI suggest it is feasible, culturally appropriate, and potentially impactful in improving ART adherence among South African adolescents [13–15].

In the present study, we describe the initial development and contextual adaptation of the MASI app for use among AYALHIV in Benue State, Nigeria. This phase of the project involved a series of focus group discussions (FGDs) with AYALHIV. These findings directly informed the customization of the app to reflect the sociocultural and health system context of the target population. This user-centered, formative phase sets the foundation for the subsequent randomized controlled trial to evaluate the feasibility, acceptability, and effectiveness of the adapted app in improving ART adherence in this high-burden region.

Materials and methods

Study design

This study employed a modified HCD process focusing on formative qualitative input to inform the contextual adaptation of the MASI mobile app for AYALHIV in Benue State, Nigeria [12]. HCD emphasizes participatory processes in which end users actively contribute to the identification of needs and the co-creation of solutions. The formative phase of the project included a series of FGDs with AYALHIV aimed at identifying adherence barriers, assessing user experiences with an early version of the MASI app, and generating insights to guide app customization.

Following thematic analysis, and to ensure systematic prioritization of suggested features, we applied the Must have, Should have, Could have, and Won’t have (MoSCoW) method which allowed us to balance user preferences with technical feasibility and resource constraints [16,17]. This dual framework ensured that the adaptation process remained both user-driven and practically implementable.

Study setting

The study was conducted at three high-volume HIV treatment facilities in Makurdi Local Government Area, Benue State. These sites are supported by APIN Public Health Initiatives under the PEPFAR program and collectively provide ART to over 19,000 clients, including a significant adolescent and young adult population.

Participant recruitment

Participants were recruited through consecutive recruitment at the three HIV treatment clinics in Benue State, Nigeria. Individuals were eligible to participate if they were aged 15–24 years at the time of recruitment (adolescents aged 15–19 years and young adults aged 20–24 years), were currently receiving ART at one of the participating sites, owned an Android smartphone, and demonstrated basic digital literacy. Demographic data were collected at the time of participation. To ensure confidentiality, participants were assigned anonymous pseudonyms for all transcripts and study records.

Ethical considerations

Written informed consent was obtained from all adult participants, and assent was obtained from adolescents under 18 years, along with guardian consent. Confidentiality and data security were maintained throughout the study. Ethical approval for the study was obtained from the National Health Research Ethics Committee of Nigeria (NHREC) with approval number NHREC/01/01/2007–15/06/2024D.

Pre-FGD app exposure

To support informed and meaningful participation in the FGDs, the existing version of the MASI app, originally developed for adolescents living with HIV in South Africa, was installed on participants’ Android smartphones approximately one month prior to their scheduled FGD. The recruitment and installation commenced on 4th September 2023 and ended on 2nd October 2023.

At the time of installation, participants received a brief orientation on how to access and navigate the app. Over the next four weeks, participants were encouraged to explore all app features independently at their own pace. No formal training, usage goals, or structured engagement requirements were imposed during this period. This approach allowed users to develop familiarity with the app’s content and functionality in a naturalistic manner, thereby enabling more grounded feedback during the FGDs.

Focus group design and implementation

Three FGDs were conducted to gather feedback on the contextual adaptation of the MASI app. In total, 22 participants took part in the discussions. Groups were stratified by age and gender to promote comfort and peer comparability: (1) one mixed-gender adolescent group aged 15–19 years (n = 6), (2) one male young adult group aged 20–24 years (n = 8), and (3) one female young adult group aged 20–24 years (n = 8). Participants were recruited consecutively during routine clinic visits at the participating study sites.

All FGDs were conducted in private rooms within the participating health facilities to ensure confidentiality and participant comfort. Discussions were facilitated using FGD interview guides developed for this study. The discussion guide was developed in English and administered in English; no translation was required. To support participation, each individual received a transport stipend of 5,000 naira. Lunch was also provided during the sessions.

Data management

Participant information, including names and mobile phone numbers, was stored in a separate, password-protected file accessible only to designated study personnel. This information was used solely for scheduling FGDs and administering participant compensation. All physical data (e.g., printed transcripts or handwritten notes) were stored in locked file cabinets at the study coordination offices and accessed only when in use. Digital data, including audio recordings and typed transcripts, were stored on secure, limited-access network drives maintained by the lead research institution. To safeguard confidentiality, participants were assigned pseudonyms in all transcripts and written materials. Participants were also reminded not to disclose any identifying information or details discussed during the FGDs to individuals outside the group.

Data analysis and feature prioritisation

All focus group discussions were conducted in English. This was appropriate because participants were required to be sufficiently literate to operate the Lu Dedoo/MASI app, which was available in English, and to participate meaningfully in group discussion. The focus group discussion guide was therefore developed and administered in English and was not translated into local languages. In addition to audio-recording, field notes were taken during each session to document non-verbal expressions, group interactions, and contextual observations that could support interpretation during analysis.

All FGDs were audio-recorded with participants’ consent and transcribed verbatim by a trained research assistant familiar with the study protocol. To ensure accuracy, a second trained research assistant and the first author reviewed each transcript against the corresponding audio file and corrected any discrepancies. All transcripts were de-identified before analysis and imported into NVivo® v15 for qualitative data management and coding.

We used thematic analysis following Braun and Clarke’s six-step approach [18]. To develop the coding framework, three transcripts were initially coded independently by two researchers. The team then compared codes, discussed areas of overlap and divergence, and agreed on a preliminary coding framework. A combined deductive and inductive approach was used. Deductive codes were derived from the study objectives and the major domains covered in the FGD guide, including app usability, engagement, reminder functions, barriers to use, and suggested modifications. Inductive coding was then applied to identify additional concepts emerging directly from participant narratives that were not fully captured in the initial framework. The coding framework was refined iteratively and then applied across the full dataset. Coding differences were resolved through discussion and consensus. Field notes were used to support interpretation of the transcripts but were not analysed as standalone data sources. The final coding framework comprised three overarching themes, each with related subthemes derived from recurrent codes identified across the dataset (Table 1).

Table 1. Coding framework used for thematic analysis of focus group discussions.

Overarching theme Subtheme Contributing codes Description Example quotation
User engagement Interactive and gamified features User experience and engagement; user satisfaction; engagement with app features Participants described games, quizzes, badges, and other interactive features as enjoyable and motivating, helping sustain interest in app use. “The games, activities and quiz are fun for me. Earning the badges is interesting.”
User engagement Health education and informational value Content relevance and interest; educational impact of app content Participants valued educational content, including information on nutrition, sex education, and adherence, and saw this as an important part of the app’s usefulness. “The quiz and articles helps me with tips I need, e.g., nutrition, how to become suppressed.”
User engagement Motivation for self-care and treatment engagement Perceived utility in medication adherence; app impact on behavior; impact on medication adherence behavior Participants reported that the app increased health awareness, encouraged medication-taking, and strengthened personal commitment to treatment. “The app helps me take my health seriously.”
User engagement Social and peer connection Social support and interaction; engagement with app features Participants expressed interest in communication and peer-support features that could foster connection and shared experience. “The public chat is more preferable to me so you can get to meet new people.”
App functionality Ease of navigation and general usability App reliability; app accessibility; user experience Participants generally perceived the app as easy to navigate and use after initial familiarisation. “The app is easy to navigate, it makes it easy to move from one step to the other like you’re chatting with someone.”
App functionality Navigation, login, and access barriers App navigation and functionality; barriers to app utilization; challenges in app navigation Some participants reported difficulties locating the app, entering access codes, or accessing specific features. “Access code request for the login is giving me difficulty accessing the app.”
App functionality Reminder and tracking functions Reminder effectiveness; perceived effectiveness in medication reminders Medication reminders, alarms, and tracking functions were perceived as helpful in supporting adherence routines. “The alarm/notification helps me to take my drugs.”
App functionality Internet and technical constraints Technical challenges; technical support issues Data costs, poor connectivity, and internet dependence limited consistent access to some app functions. “I don’t always have enough data on my phone.”
App functionality Privacy and discretion concerns Privacy concerns Some participants expressed concerns about privacy, disclosure, and comfort with interactive features. “When I was asked to speak to my doctor, I shied away because I am a very secretive person.”
Suggested modifications for improvement Offline functionality Technical challenges; feedback and suggestions; feedback and suggestions for improvement Participants recommended that core app features should be accessible without internet connectivity. “The app should be accessed even without data.”
Suggested modifications for improvement Customisable and more prominent reminders Feedback and suggestions; perceived effectiveness in medication reminders Participants suggested improving reminders through sound, stronger prompts, and greater personalisation. “The reminders should be a sound (audio) not a silent beep.”
Suggested modifications for improvement Simpler onboarding and access pathways App accessibility; app navigation and functionality Participants recommended streamlining first-time access, login, and app entry processes. “The link to access the app should be easily sent to your phone not email.”
Suggested modifications for improvement Enhanced communication and support features Social support and interaction; feedback and suggestions for improvement Participants suggested adding or improving chat and expert-support functions to strengthen interaction and support. “Chat bolt can be added on the Ludedoo app.”
Suggested modifications for improvement More locally relevant and youth-friendly content Content relevance and interest; educational impact of app content Participants wanted content that was more relatable, engaging, and tailored to their context and age group. “The app is generally exciting for me. I learn about sex education.”

In line with HCD principles, emergent themes were translated into design requirements and feature suggestions. These were then organized and prioritized using the MoSCoW method: Must have: essential features for functionality and user acceptance (e.g., offline access, medication reminders), Should have: important but not critical features (e.g., localized multimedia content), Could have: desirable features to improve user experience (e.g., customizable avatars, gamified reminders), and Won’t have (for now): features not feasible in the current development cycle [16].

App Adaptation and Feature Refinement Process

The Nigerian research team synthesised key thematic findings from the FGDs, with particular attention to participant feedback on usability, content relevance and preferences. These findings were prioritised and translated into specific, actionable recommendations for app modification.

Proposed changes were shared with the app development team through a series of structured virtual meetings. This iterative process ensured that adaptations were both user-informed and technically viable, maintaining the core functionalities of the original platform while enhancing its relevance for AYALHIV in Benue State.

Results

The first phase of the study involved collecting in-depth feedback from AYALHIV in Benue State, Nigeria, following 1 month of beta testing the MASI app prototype. Thematic analysis of the FGDs highlighted three major themes: User Engagement, App Functionality, and Suggested Modifications for Improvement.

User engagement

Participants responded positively to the app’s engaging features, particularly the interactive and gamified sections. Elements such as quizzes, badges, and games were frequently cited as primary drivers of interest and regular app usage. Several users reported that these elements made the experience enjoyable and rewarding, as one adolescent participant noted:

“The quiz was interesting. I always checked to see if there was a new one. It felt good when I got answers right.” (Male, 20 years old)

The gamification features, such as badges, enhanced emotional engagement, especially among adolescents aged 15–19. For instance, a female participant shared her experience:

“I liked the winning badges. It made me feel like I was doing something good for myself.” (Female, 20 years old)

The self-tracking features, which allowed participants to visualise their adherence behaviours, were also highly valued. These features helped users stay on track with their medication regimen and provided a sense of accountability. One participant explained:

“I checked my medicine tracker every morning. It helped me stay on time with my drugs.” (Female, 21 years old)

However, participants suggested diversifying the reward system, such as incorporating new levels or customizable avatars, to sustain long-term engagement. Participants’ preferences regarding user engagement are summarised in Table 2.

Table 2. Participants’ Preferences Regarding User Engagement.

Category Description
Interactive Features Participants reported positive experiences with interactive elements such as games, quizzes, and badges, which made the app enjoyable and encouraged regular use.
Emotional Engagement Gamified components, particularly among adolescents aged 15–19, fostered emotional connection and increased engagement with health content.
Self-Tracking Features that allowed users to monitor their medication adherence enhanced self-awareness and a sense of accountability.
Motivation The interactive and reward-based aspects of the app served as external motivators, reinforcing consistent use and supporting ART adherence among AYALHIV.

App functionality

Participants generally found the app easy to navigate (Table 3). One participant shared:

Table 3. Participants’ Preferences for App Functionality and Usabili.

Category Description
Ease of Navigation App was generally easy to navigate, especially for those with prior smartphone experience.
Reminder Features Reminders encouraged medication adherence.
Internet Data Dependency App required mobile data.
User Support Suggested tutorial videos to help new users learn app functions.

“I didn’t need help to understand where to go or what to do.” (Participant 3, Male, 23 years old)

However, some participants pointed out challenges related to internet data availability, with one female participant highlighting:

“It’s a good app, but without data, I couldn’t watch the videos when my data finished.” (Female, 20 years old)

While the navigation and layout were deemed intuitive, a few participants faced difficulties, particularly with features like setting reminders and accessing the chat function. One participant remarked:

“I needed help the first time. But after that, it was simple.” (Male, 22 years old)

Suggested modifications for improvement

Participants suggested several actionable improvements to increase the app’s accessibility, relevance, and overall functionality (Table 4).

Table 4. Participants’ Suggested Modifications for Improvement.

Category Description
Offline Access Desire for offline functionality for key features like medication tracker and quizzes.
Multimedia Content Requests for more frequent updates, local-language videos, animations, and testimonials.
Customization Options for personalized reminder tones, timing, and motivational messages.
Gamified Reminders Suggestions to include gamified or musical reminders to enhance engagement.
Social Features Requests for in-app forums or chat rooms for anonymous peer interaction and stigma reduction.

Participants also requested more frequent updates to multimedia content, including local-language videos, animations, and peer testimonials. These additions were seen as crucial for enhancing both informational content and emotional support. A participant stated:

“If someone like me talks about taking ARVs in a video, it would encourage others like me. We want to hear from people we can relate to.” (PFemale, 21 years old)

Customizable medication reminders were another frequently mentioned improvement, with users suggesting features like personalized reminder tones, adjustable timing, and motivational messages. One male participant shared:

“They should include personalized sound or message.” (Male, 19 years old)

Finally, social features such as in-app forums or chat rooms for anonymous peer interaction were proposed to foster a sense of community, reduce stigma, and facilitate the sharing of coping strategies. Additionally, the inclusion of links to local support resources like clinics or helplines was recommended.

Recommendation was made for offline access, especially for features like the medication tracker, daily quizzes, and educational content. One participant expressed:

“I want to open it anytime, even without data.” (Female, 20 years old)

Feature Prioritization Using the MoSCoW Method

To translate participant feedback into actionable design requirements, we applied the MoSCoW prioritization framework (“Must have,” “Should have,” “Could have,” “Won’t have”) [16]. This method provided a structured approach for balancing user preferences with technical feasibility during the adaptation of MASI. This process ensured that the most critical features identified by adolescents and young adults were prioritised for immediate development, while secondary or less feasible suggestions were reserved for later iterations.

Lu Dedoo app development progress

The Nigerian research team reviewed the MoSCoW prioritisation with the app development team and implemented key modifications. Regular updates of prioritised features were added, including medication tracking and quizzes. Additionally, the team incorporated more multimedia content, including peer-driven games and localised educational materials.

Discussion

This study describes the use of a modified HCD methodology to adapt a medication adherence app to the local context. This study explored the experiences and preferences surrounding the use of a medication adherence app among AYALHIV in Benue State, Nigeria. Qualitative data from participants were analyzed to inform the contextual adaptation of the MASI app, ensuring its relevance and responsiveness to the unique needs of AYALHIV in this setting. Participants engaged with an early version of the app for one month and shared their feedback in FGDs. Thematic analysis of these discussions informed iterative app modifications that responded directly to user needs and local realities. Overall, participants across all FGDs expressed favorable impressions of the app, describing it as easy to navigate, culturally relevant, and aligned with their preferences for simple, engaging digital tools.

Interactive features such as games, quizzes, badges, forums and medication trackers emerged as key drivers of sustained app engagement. All FGD participants reported willingness to use the app long-term, especially if it could be accessed offline and featured more localized content. Participants suggested design enhancements to improve functionality, accessibility, and emotional resonance. Notably, offline capability, local-language multimedia, customizable reminders, and anonymous peer forums were identified as essential additions.

A few participants reported experiencing initial difficulty using the app’s chat and reminder features, underscoring the need for simple user onboarding support. Participants also expressed concernes that Internet data limitations could hinder access to multimedia content. These challenges are consistent with previous studies highlighting the infrastructural barriers to mHealth uptake in low-resource settings [19,20].

Our findings are aligned with a growing body of evidence demonstrating that mHealth interventions are both feasible and effective for supporting HIV care in sub-Saharan Africa. Studies have shown that such apps are particularly appealing to adolescents when they incorporate youth-friendly designs, localized content, and features supporting peer engagement [21,22]. Interactive features and social components have been linked to increased motivation and self-efficacy in ART adherence among young populations [23]. Several studies have similarly applied HCD approaches, using FGDs as a primary method for requirement gathering and app adaptation in mHealth development, reporting positive outcomes in aligning digital tools with user needs [11,23–25].

Our study contributes to this evidence by applying a participatory adaptation process to MASI which was originally developed in South Africa and tailoring it for the Nigerian context. Rather than designing an entirely new app, we followed an efficient adaptation pathway that maintained core functionalities while localizing content, and interface elements. This approach aligns with implementation science principles that call for the reuse and modification of proven tools to accelerate public health impact [26].

In this study, while thematic analysis captured the breadth of adolescent preferences, the application of MoSCoW enabled us to distinguish between features considered essential for usability (“Must have”) and those desirable but less critical (“Should have” and “Could have”). This prioritization was crucial for balancing user demands with technical feasibility and resource constraints, ensuring that development efforts focused first on high-impact adaptations such as offline access and medication reminders. Similar to other digital health co-design projects where MoSCoW has been used to integrate youth perspectives into feasible intervention components [27] our study demonstrates the value of combining participatory methods with structured prioritization frameworks.

Limitations

This study’s generalizability is limited by its geographic scope and participant criteria. However, the focused scope of this study could also be a strength rather than a limitation. The purpose of the formative phase was to ensure that the MASI app was meaningfully adapted to Benue State’s unique sociocultural and infrastructural context. Recognising that the original South African version of the app may not fully reflect the experiences of Nigerian youth, the localised feedback obtained through these FGDs allowed for precise, context-specific design modifications. While the resulting adaptations may not be directly generalizable to other regions such as Abuja or rural settings, this reflects the very essence of human-centred design, creating digital tools that are responsive to the needs and lived realities of a defined user community.

Conclusions

This formative study demonstrates the value of human-centered, user-informed design in adapting mHealth solutions for young people living with HIV in Nigeria. The Lu Dedoo Project successfully leveraged youth feedback to guide the contextual adaptation of the MASI app, yielding a more relevant and accessible platform for adherence support. Offline access, peer content, customizable reminders, and simplified onboarding are now being integrated in response to user input.

A pilot trial is underway to assess feasibility, usability, and potential adherence outcomes. If successful, the Lu Dedoo adaptation of MASI could serve as a scalable model for similar digital health interventions across West Africa and other HIV high-burden settings.

Acknowledgments

The authors wish to express their sincere gratitude to all adolescents and young adults living with HIV who participated in this study and generously shared their time, experiences, and insights during the focus group discussions. Their contributions were instrumental in shaping the Lu Dedoo app’s adaptation to reflect the realities and preferences of young people in Benue State. We also acknowledge the dedicated healthcare providers and staff at Northbank General Hospital, Bishop Murray Medical Centre, and Federal Medical Centre, Makurdi, for their invaluable support during participant recruitment and data collection. This is to also appreciate the Desmond Tutu Foundation and APIN Public Health Initiatives staff who were involved in this project.

Data Availability

The minimal data set and accompanying analytic materials are available at Mendeley Data via https://doi.org/10.17632/vwmmnhgsz6.1.

Funding Statement

This work was supported by the European & Developing Countries Clinical Trials Partnership 2 (EDCTP2) programme under grant number EDCTP TMA2019SFP-2812, through the Desmond Tutu Health Foundation, South Africa. There was no additional external funding received for this study.

References

  • 1.Daltro ACB, Almeida CS, Unfried AGC, de Aquino TR, Travassos AGÁ. Virological failure and adherence to antiretroviral therapy in adolescents and young adults living with human immunodeficiency virus. Trop Med Int Health. 2023;28(3):162–74. doi: 10.1111/tmi.13854 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Moomba K, Van Wyk B. Social and economic barriers to adherence among patients at Livingstone General Hospital in Zambia. Afr J Prim Health Care Fam Med. 2019;11(1):e1–6. doi: 10.4102/phcfm.v11i1.1740 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Ahmed SI, Farooqui M, Syed Sulaiman SA, Hassali MA, Lee CKC. Facilitators and Barriers Affecting Adherence Among People Living With HIV/AIDS: A Qualitative Perspective. J Patient Exp. 2019;6(1):33–40. doi: 10.1177/2374373518770805 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Ekenberg M, Qvarnström M, Sundström A, Martinell M, Wettermark B. Socioeconomic factors associated with poor medication adherence in patients with type 2 diabetes. Eur J Clin Pharmacol. 2024;80(1):53–63. doi: 10.1007/s00228-023-03571-8 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.NAIIS. National summary sheet. Abuja: NAIIS. 2019. [Google Scholar]
  • 6.index Mundi. Nigeria Age Structure - Demographics 2020. https://www.indexmundi.com/nigeria/age_structure.html. Accessed 2025 August 7.
  • 7.Mi RZ, Yang EF, Tahk A, Tarfa A, Cotter LM, Lu L, et al. mHealth Engagement for Antiretroviral Medication Adherence Among People With HIV and Substance Use Disorders: Observational Study. J Med Internet Res. 2024;26:e57774. doi: 10.2196/57774 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Wang T, Huang Y-M, Chan H-Y. Exploration of Features of Mobile Applications for Medication Adherence in Asia: Narrative Review. J Med Internet Res. 2024;26:e60787. doi: 10.2196/60787 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Peng Y, Wang H, Fang Q, Xie L, Shu L, Sun W, et al. Effectiveness of Mobile Applications on Medication Adherence in Adults with Chronic Diseases: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. J Manag Care Spec Pharm. 2020;26(4):550–61. doi: 10.18553/jmcp.2020.26.4.550 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Ahonkhai AA, Pierce LJ, Mbugua S, Wasula B, Owino S, Nmoh A, et al. PEERNaija: A Gamified mHealth Behavioral Intervention to Improve Adherence to Antiretroviral Treatment Among Adolescents and Young Adults in Nigeria. Front Reprod Health. 2021;3:656507. doi: 10.3389/frph.2021.656507 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Idigbe I, Were M, Pierce LJ, Ekelem C, Nmoh A, Gbaja-Biamila T, et al. User-centered adaption of PEERNaija, A novel mhealth application integrating medication reminders with virtual peer support and social/financial incentives to improve medication adherence. AIDS Care. 2025;37(2):263–78. doi: 10.1080/09540121.2024.2445789 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Göttgens I, Oertelt-Prigione S. The Application of Human-Centered Design Approaches in Health Research and Innovation: A Narrative Review of Current Practices. JMIR Mhealth Uhealth. 2021;9(12):e28102. doi: 10.2196/28102 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Hightow-Weidman LB, Muessig KE, Pike EC, LeGrand S, Baltierra N, Rucker AJ, et al. HealthMpowerment.org: Building Community Through a Mobile-Optimized, Online Health Promotion Intervention. Health Educ Behav. 2015;42(4):493–9. doi: 10.1177/1090198114562043 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Mulawa MI, Hoare J, Knippler ET, Mtukushe B, Matiwane M, Muessig KE, et al. MASI, a Smartphone App to Improve Treatment Adherence Among South African Adolescents and Young Adults With HIV: Protocol for a Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial. JMIR Res Protoc. 2023;12:e47137. doi: 10.2196/47137 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Mulawa MI, Mtukushe B, Knippler ET, Matiwane M, Al-Mujtaba M, Muessig KE, et al. Supporting Adolescents With HIV in South Africa Through an Adherence-Supporting App: Mixed Methods Beta-Testing Study. JMIR Form Res. 2023;7:e47575. doi: 10.2196/47575 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Miranda E. Moscow Rules: A Quantitative Exposé. Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing. Springer International Publishing. 2022. p. 19–34. doi: 10.1007/978-3-031-08169-9_2 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 17.O’Connor SR, Wilson V, Brown D, Cleland I, McCance TV. Development and optimisation of a mobile app (iMPAKT) for improving person-centred practice in healthcare settings: A multi-methods evaluation study. Digit Health. 2024;10:20552076241271788. doi: 10.1177/20552076241271788 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 18.Braun V, Clarke V. Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qual Res Psychol. 2006;3:77–101. doi: 10.1191/1478088706QP063OA [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Erku D, Khatri R, Endalamaw A, Wolka E, Nigatu F, Zewdie A, et al. Digital Health Interventions to Improve Access to and Quality of Primary Health Care Services: A Scoping Review. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2023;20(19):6854. doi: 10.3390/ijerph20196854 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20.Crowley T, Petinger C, Nchendia A, van Wyk B. Effectiveness, Acceptability and Feasibility of Technology-Enabled Health Interventions for Adolescents Living with HIV in Low- and Middle-Income Countries: A Systematic Review. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2023;20:2464. doi: 10.3390/IJERPH20032464 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 21.Kiirya Y, Kitaka S, Kalyango J, Rujumba J, Obeng-Amoako GAO, Amollo M, et al. Acceptability of an online peer support group as a strategy to improve antiretroviral therapy adherence among young people in Kampala district, Uganda: qualitative findings. BMC Infect Dis. 2025;25(1):461. doi: 10.1186/s12879-025-10831-8 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 22.Fischer AE, Hanif H, Stocks JB, Rochelle AE, Dominguez K, Armora Langoni EG, et al. Mobile Health Intervention Tools Promoting HIV Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis Among Adolescent Girls and Young Women in Sub-Saharan Africa: Scoping Review. JMIR Mhealth Uhealth. 2025;13:e60819. doi: 10.2196/60819 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 23.Muessig KE, LeGrand S, Horvath KJ, Bauermeister JA, Hightow-Weidman LB. Recent mHealth interventions to support medication adherence among HIV-positive men who have sex with men. Curr Opin HIV AIDS. 2017;12:432. doi: 10.1097/COH.0000000000000401 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 24.Chandler R, Hernandez N, Guillaume D, Grandoit S, Branch-Ellis D, Lightfoot M. A Community-Engaged Approach to Creating a Mobile HIV Prevention App for Black Women: Focus Group Study to Determine Preferences via Prototype Demos. JMIR Mhealth Uhealth. 2020;8(7):e18437. doi: 10.2196/18437 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 25.Clement ME, Lovett A, Caldwell S, Beckford J, Hilgart M, Corneli A, et al. Development of an mHealth App to Support the Prevention of Sexually Transmitted Infections Among Black Men Who Have Sex With Men Engaged in Pre-exposure Prophylaxis Care in New Orleans, Louisiana: Qualitative User-Centered Design Study. JMIR Form Res. 2023;7:e43019. doi: 10.2196/43019 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 26.Thalia OP. The Impact of Digital Health Interventions on Antiretroviral Therapy Adherence among Adolescents Living with HIV in Sub-Saharan Africa. RIJPP. 2025;4(1):51–5. doi: 10.59298/rijpp/2025/415155 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 27.Bucci S, Newton A, Whelan P, Cartwright K, Chitsabsean P, Foster S, et al. Reporting on a Partnership to Co-Design a Digital Health Intervention With Young People Who Have Experienced Technology-Assisted Sexual Abuse. Health Expect. 2025;28(3):e70288. doi: 10.1111/hex.70288 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Decision Letter 0

Ibrahim Jahun

22 Feb 2026

-->PONE-D-25-66140-->-->Adapting a Medication Adherence App for Adolescents and Young Adults in Makurdi, Benue State: The Lu Dedoo Project"-->-->PLOS One

Dear Dr. Olatoregun,

Thank you for submitting your manuscript to PLOS ONE. After careful consideration, we feel that it has merit but does not fully meet PLOS ONE’s publication criteria as it currently stands. Therefore, we invite you to submit a revised version of the manuscript that addresses the points raised during the review process.

ACADEMIC EDITOR: -->-->The study describes processes of adapting an mHealth software to support adherence among adolescents and young adults living with HIV. This is an important initiative that if well adapted and utilized may improve adherence among the study population. The study design is appropriate, however there are several details lacking in the methodology section. Qualitative study requires very explicit methodology to aid transparency and reproducibility. Please address the following comments in addition to comment provided by the two reviewers below.-->--> -->-->Methodology: The section is lacking several details such as language used in FGD, were the questionnaires in English or local languages, were the translated? Were field notes collected. How was the transcription done from audio to text? How many transcripts were initially coded to develop the coding framework? Please provide the coding framework as figure or describe it explicitly. How was inductive and deductive coding approaches applied? E.t.c.-->-->

Results: It is unclear about the number of participants. Please provide demographic characteristics of the participants. Also provide details of each group participating in the FGD.

Acknowledgement: It was stated that “This work was supported by EDCTP2 (EDCTP TMA2019SFP-2812”, is this the funder? Funding information shouldn’t appear under acknowledgement.

-->-->Please submit your revised manuscript by Apr 08 2026 11:59PM. If you will need more time than this to complete your revisions, please reply to this message or contact the journal office at plosone@plos.org. When you're ready to submit your revision, log on to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/ and select the 'Submissions Needing Revision' folder to locate your manuscript file.

Please include the following items when submitting your revised manuscript:-->

  • A letter that responds to each point raised by the academic editor and reviewer(s). You should upload this letter as a separate file labeled 'Response to Reviewers'.

  • A marked-up copy of your manuscript that highlights changes made to the original version. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Revised Manuscript with Track Changes'.

  • An unmarked version of your revised paper without tracked changes. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Manuscript'.

If you would like to make changes to your financial disclosure, please include your updated statement in your cover letter. Guidelines for resubmitting your figure files are available below the reviewer comments at the end of this letter.

We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript.

Kind regards,

Ibrahim Jahun, MD, MSc, PhD

Academic Editor

PLOS One

Journal Requirements:

When submitting your revision, we need you to address these additional requirements.

1. Please ensure that your manuscript meets PLOS ONE's style requirements, including those for file naming. The PLOS ONE style templates can be found at

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=wjVg/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_main_body.pdf and https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=ba62/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_title_authors_affiliations.pdf

2. Thank you for stating in your Funding Statement:

[This work was supported by EDCTP2 (EDCTP TMA2019SFP-2812) through Desmond Tutu Foundation, South Africa].

Please provide an amended statement that declares *all* the funding or sources of support (whether external or internal to your organization) received during this study, as detailed online in our guide for authors at http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submit-now Please also include the statement “There was no additional external funding received for this study.” in your updated Funding Statement.

Please include your amended Funding Statement within your cover letter. We will change the online submission form on your behalf.

3. Please expand the acronym “EDCTP2” (as indicated in your financial disclosure) so that it states the name of your funders in full.

This information should be included in your cover letter; we will change the online submission form on your behalf.

4. Thank you for stating the following in the Acknowledgments Section of your manuscript:

[This is to also appreciate the Desmond Tutu Foundation and APIN Public Health Initiatives staff who were involved in this project. This work was supported by EDCTP2 (EDCTP TMA2019SFP-2812)]

We note that you have provided funding information that is currently declared in your Funding Statement. However, funding information should not appear in the Acknowledgments section or other areas of your manuscript. We will only publish funding information present in the Funding Statement section of the online submission form.

Please remove any funding-related text from the manuscript and let us know how you would like to update your Funding Statement. Currently, your Funding Statement reads as follows:

[This work was supported by EDCTP2 (EDCTP TMA2019SFP-2812) through Desmond Tutu Foundation, South Africa]

Please include your amended statements within your cover letter; we will change the online submission form on your behalf.

5. Please note that your Data Availability Statement is currently missing the repository name and/or the DOI/accession number of each dataset. If your manuscript is accepted for publication, you will be asked to provide these details on a very short timeline. We therefore suggest that you provide this information now, though we will not hold up the peer review process if you are unable.

6. Your ethics statement should only appear in the Methods section of your manuscript. If your ethics statement is written in any section besides the Methods, please move it to the Methods section and delete it from any other section. Please ensure that your ethics statement is included in your manuscript, as the ethics statement entered into the online submission form will not be published alongside your manuscript.

7. We note that Figures 1, 2, and 3 in your submission contain copyrighted images. All PLOS content is published under the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY 4.0), which means that the manuscript, images, and Supporting Information files will be freely available online, and any third party is permitted to access, download, copy, distribute, and use these materials in any way, even commercially, with proper attribution. For more information, see our copyright guidelines: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/licenses-and-copyright.

We require you to either (1) present written permission from the copyright holder to publish these figures specifically under the CC BY 4.0 license, or (2) remove the figures from your submission:

1. You may seek permission from the original copyright holder of Figures 1, 2, and 3 to publish the content specifically under the CC BY 4.0 license.

We recommend that you contact the original copyright holder with the Content Permission Form (http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=7c09/content-permission-form.pdf) and the following text:

“I request permission for the open-access journal PLOS ONE to publish XXX under the Creative Commons Attribution License (CCAL) CC BY 4.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). Please be aware that this license allows unrestricted use and distribution, even commercially, by third parties. Please reply and provide explicit written permission to publish XXX under a CC BY license and complete the attached form.”

Please upload the completed Content Permission Form or other proof of granted permissions as an "Other" file with your submission.

In the figure caption of the copyrighted figure, please include the following text: “Reprinted from [ref] under a CC BY license, with permission from [name of publisher], original copyright [original copyright year].”

2. If you are unable to obtain permission from the original copyright holder to publish these figures under the CC BY 4.0 license or if the copyright holder’s requirements are incompatible with the CC BY 4.0 license, please either i) remove the figure or ii) supply a replacement figure that complies with the CC BY 4.0 license. Please check copyright information on all replacement figures and update the figure caption with source information. If applicable, please specify in the figure caption text when a figure is similar but not identical to the original image and is therefore for illustrative purposes only.

8. We note you have included a table to which you do not refer in the text of your manuscript. Please ensure that you refer to Tables 1, 2, and 3 in your text; if accepted, production will need this reference to link the reader to the Tables.

9. We note that your manuscript consists of interview transcripts. Can you please confirm that all participants gave consent for interview transcript to be published?

If they DID provide consent for these transcripts to be published, please also confirm that the transcripts do not contain any potentially identifying information (or let us know if the participants consented to having their personal details published and made publicly available). We consider the following details to be identifying information:

- Names, nicknames, and initials

- Age more specific than round numbers

- GPS coordinates, physical addresses, IP addresses, email addresses

- Information in small sample sizes (e.g. 40 students from X class in X year at X university)

- Specific dates (e.g. visit dates, interview dates)

- ID numbers

Or, if the participants DID NOT provide consent for these transcripts to be published:

- Provide a de-identified version of the data or excerpts of interview responses

- Provide information regarding how these transcripts can be accessed by researchers who meet the criteria for access to confidential data, including:

a) the grounds for restriction

b) the name of the ethics committee, Institutional Review Board, or third-party organization that is imposing sharing restrictions on the data

c) a non-author, institutional point of contact that is able to field data access queries, in the interest of maintaining long-term data accessibility.

d) Any relevant data set names, URLs, DOIs, etc. that an independent researcher would need in order to request your minimal data set.

For further information on sharing data that contains sensitive participant information, please see: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/data-availability#loc-human-research-participant-data-and-other-sensitive-data

If there are ethical, legal, or third-party restrictions upon your dataset, you must provide all of the following details (https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/data-availability#loc-acceptable-data-access-restrictions):

1. A complete description of the dataset

2. The nature of the restrictions upon the data (ethical, legal, or owned by a third party) and the reasoning behind them

3. The full name of the body imposing the restrictions upon your dataset (ethics committee, institution, data access committee, etc.)

4. If the data are owned by a third party, confirmation of whether the authors received any special privileges in accessing the data that other researchers would not have

5. Direct, non-author contact information (preferably email) for the body imposing the restrictions upon the data, to which data access requests can be sent

If the reviewer comments include a recommendation to cite specific previously published works, please review and evaluate these publications to determine whether they are relevant and should be cited. There is no requirement to cite these works unless the editor has indicated otherwise.

[Note: HTML markup is below. Please do not edit.]

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

-->Comments to the Author

1. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented. -->

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

-->2. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously? -->

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

-->3. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.-->

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

-->4. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.-->

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

-->5. Review Comments to the Author

Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters)-->

Reviewer #1: The author should clarify the following:

1. Regarding participants recruitment refer to line 119 provider referral and line 149 consecutive recruitment

2. Regarding number of study sites refer to line 119 study was conducted at three HIV treatment clinics versus line 150 two study sites

3. Line 155 revise transport stipend of USD 10 equivalent in local currency

Reviewer #2: The author should clearly define what MASI stands for at first mention.

Participants should be selected based on documented non-adherence in order to properly validate the effectiveness of the app.

Inferential statistical analysis should be used to compare adherence levels, using viral load results before and after the intervention.

The study should follow newly enrolled clients for seven months and stable clients for one year to allow for meaningful viral load assessment.

A focus group discussion (FGD) should be incorporated alongside the quantitative analysis to capture participants’ perspectives and experiences.

Overall, it is not possible to conclude that the app improves adherence among AYALHIV without supporting clinical data to provide objective evidence.

**********

-->6. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.-->

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: Yes: Agboola Samson

**********

[NOTE: If reviewer comments were submitted as an attachment file, they will be attached to this email and accessible via the submission site. Please log into your account, locate the manuscript record, and check for the action link "View Attachments". If this link does not appear, there are no attachment files.]

To ensure your figures meet our technical requirements, please review our figure guidelines: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/figures

You may also use PLOS’s free figure tool, NAAS, to help you prepare publication quality figures: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/figures#loc-tools-for-figure-preparation.

NAAS will assess whether your figures meet our technical requirements by comparing each figure against our figure specifications.

PLoS One. 2026 May 29;21(5):e0350279. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0350279.r002

Author response to Decision Letter 1


7 Apr 2026

Dear Dr. Jahun and Reviewers,

Thank you for the careful review of our manuscript and for the constructive comments. We appreciate the opportunity to revise the manuscript. We have carefully All changes have been incorporated into both the tracked and clean versions of the manuscript.

Below, we provide a point-by-point response.

Response to the Academic Editor

Comment 1: Qualitative methodology requires more detail

“The section is lacking several details such as language used in FGD, were the questionnaires in English or local languages, were the translated? Were field notes collected. How was the transcription done from audio to text? How many transcripts were initially coded to develop the coding framework? Please provide the coding framework as figure or describe it explicitly. How was inductive and deductive coding approaches applied? E.t.c.”

Response:

Thank you for this important comment. We have substantially revised the qualitative methodology section to improve transparency and reproducibility. Specifically, we have now clarified that all FGDs were conducted in English; the discussion guide was developed and administered in English and was not translated; field notes were collected during each discussion; all FGDs were audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim by a trained research assistant; transcript accuracy was checked against the audio files by a second trained research assistant together with the first author; and three transcripts were initially coded to develop the preliminary coding framework. We have also explicitly described the combined deductive and inductive coding approach and added a coding framework table.

Comment 2: Participant numbers and group details are unclear

“It is unclear about the number of participants. Please provide demographic characteristics of the participants. Also provide details of each group participating in the FGD.”

Response:

Thank you. We have revised the manuscript to clearly report the final achieved FGD sample and group composition. The revised manuscript now states that a total of 22 participants took part in three FGDs: one mixed-gender adolescent group aged 15–19 years (n = 6), one male young adult group aged 20–24 years (n = 8), and one female young adult group aged 20–24 years (n = 8).

Comment 3: Funding information should not appear in Acknowledgments

“It was stated that ‘This work was supported by EDCTP2 (EDCTP TMA2019SFP-2812’, is this the funder? Funding information shouldn’t appear under acknowledgement.”

Response:

Thank you. We have removed all funding-related text from the Acknowledgements section. Funding information is now presented only in the Funding Statement, in accordance with PLOS ONE requirements.

Response to Reviewer 1

Comment 1: Recruitment wording is inconsistent

Comment:

“Regarding participants recruitment refer to line 119 provider referral and line 149 consecutive recruitment”

Response:

Thank you for noting this inconsistency. We have revised the manuscript to harmonise the description of recruitment. Participants were identified during routine clinic visits with support from clinic staff and were then enrolled consecutively from among those who met the eligibility criteria and agreed to participate.

Comment 2: Number of study sites is inconsistent

“Regarding number of study sites refer to line 119 study was conducted at three HIV treatment clinics versus line 150 two study sites”

Response:

Thank you. We have corrected this inconsistency in the revised manuscript. The study setting and participant recruitment sections now consistently reflect the actual qualitative study sites used for the FGDs. The study was done in 3 facilities.

Comment 3: Transport stipend wording

“Line 155 revise transport stipend of USD 10 equivalent in local currency”

Response:

Thank you. We have revised this wording in the manuscript to improve clarity and local relevance. The revised text now states the amount received in Naira

Response to Reviewer 2

Comment 1

“The author should clearly define what MASI stands for at first mention.”

Response:

Thank you. We have revised the manuscript to define MASI in full at first mention as Masakhane Siphucule Impilo Yethu.

Comment 2: Participants should be selected based on documented non-adherence to validate effectiveness

Comment:

“Participants should be selected based on documented non-adherence in order to properly validate the effectiveness of the app.”

Response:

Thank you for this thoughtful comment. We respectfully clarify that the present manuscript reports the formative qualitative adaptation phase of the Lu Dedoo project rather than the effectiveness phase. The purpose of this manuscript is to describe how the MASI app was contextually adapted for adolescents and young adults living with HIV in Benue State using user-centered qualitative input. It is therefore focused on usability, acceptability, and adaptation needs rather than validation of clinical effectiveness.

Comment 3: Inferential statistical analysis should compare adherence levels using viral load results before and after intervention

Comment:

“Inferential statistical analysis should be used to compare adherence levels, using viral load results before and after the intervention.”

Response:

Thank you. We agree that such analyses are important for evaluating effectiveness. However, these analyses fall within the subsequent pilot randomized component of the larger study and are outside the scope of the present manuscript, which is focused on the formative qualitative adaptation phase.

Comment 4: Follow newly enrolled clients for seven months and stable clients for one year for viral load assessment

Comment:

“The study should follow newly enrolled clients for seven months and stable clients for one year to allow for meaningful viral load assessment.

Response:

Thank you for this suggestion. We agree that viral load follow-up duration is an important consideration for the later effectiveness study. However, this recommendation pertains to the pilot trial phase and not to the current qualitative adaptation manuscript. We have therefore not introduced viral load outcome analysis into this paper.

Comment 5: A focus group discussion should be incorporated alongside quantitative analysis

Comment:

“A focus group discussion (FGD) should be incorporated alongside the quantitative analysis to capture participants’ perspectives and experiences.”

Response:

Thank you. We agree with this point, and indeed, the current manuscript is centred on the FGD component of the study. The present paper specifically reports on the formative focus group phase conducted prior to the pilot trial to capture participants’ perspectives, app-use experiences, and needs for contextual adaptation.

Comment 6: It is not possible to conclude that the app improves adherence without supporting clinical data

“Overall, it is not possible to conclude that the app improves adherence among AYALHIV without supporting clinical data to provide objective evidence.”

Response:

Thank you. the current manuscript is centred on the FGD component of the study. The present paper specifically reports on the formative focus group phase conducted prior to the pilot trial to capture participants’ perspectives, app-use experiences, and needs for contextual adaptation of the app.

Response to Journal Requirements

Requirement 1: PLOS ONE style requirements

Response:

We have revised the manuscript to align with PLOS ONE formatting and style requirements and will submit the files using the required naming convention.

Requirement 2: Funding statement must include all support and state no additional external funding

Response:

We have prepared an amended Funding Statement for the cover letter and submission system:

Funding Statement:

“This work was supported by the European & Developing Countries Clinical Trials Partnership 2 (EDCTP2) programme under grant number EDCTP TMA2019SFP-2812, through the Desmond Tutu Health Foundation, South Africa. There was no additional external funding received for this study.”

Requirement 3: Expand EDCTP2 in full

Response:

We have expanded EDCTP2 in full in the Funding Statement and cover letter as European & Developing Countries Clinical Trials Partnership 2 (EDCTP2).

Requirement 4: Remove funding text from the manuscript body/Acknowledgments

Response:

We have removed funding-related text from the Acknowledgments section and retained funding information only in the Funding Statement. The editor letter specifically noted the prior Acknowledgments wording.

Requirement 5: Data Availability Statement should include repository/access details

Response:

We have revised the Data Availability Statement to provide the repository name and access details for the de-identified dataset.

Requirement 6: Ethics statement should only appear in the Methods section

Response:

We have moved the ethics statement so that it appears only in the Methods section and removed it from any other section of the manuscript.

Requirement 7: Copyrighted figures

Response:

We have deleted Figures 1, 2, and 3

Requirement 8: Tables 1, 2, and 3 must be cited in text

Response:

We have revised the Results section to ensure that Tables 1, 2, and 3 are explicitly referred to in the text.

Requirement 9: Clarify consent for interview transcript publication and de-identification

Response:

We confirm that the manuscript includes only de-identified excerpts from focus group discussions and not full raw transcripts. All quotations were reviewed to ensure that they do not contain names, initials, dates, addresses, contact details, ID numbers, or other direct identifiers.

Attachment

Submitted filename: Response to Reviewers.docx

pone.0350279.s001.docx (19.6KB, docx)

Decision Letter 1

Ibrahim Jahun

13 May 2026

Adapting a Medication Adherence App for Adolescents and Young Adults in Makurdi, Benue State: The Lu Dedoo Project"

PONE-D-25-66140R1

Dear Dr. Olatoregun,

We haven't heard from both reviewers who reviewed the manuscript after reminders. I have however reviewed the responses provided to my comments and to both reviewers' comments and I am convinced that the responses provided are adequate. The major concern about this paper was the qualitative methodology as provided in my comments, and you have adequately responded to the comments.

At this point, we’re therefore pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been judged scientifically suitable for publication and will be formally accepted for publication once it meets all outstanding technical requirements.

Within one week, you’ll receive an e-mail detailing the required amendments. When these have been addressed, you’ll receive a formal acceptance letter and your manuscript will be scheduled for publication.

An invoice will be generated when your article is formally accepted. Please note, if your institution has a publishing partnership with PLOS and your article meets the relevant criteria, all or part of your publication costs will be covered. Please make sure your user information is up-to-date by logging into Editorial Manager at Editorial Manager® and clicking the ‘Update My Information' link at the top of the page. For questions related to billing, please contact billing support.

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please notify them about your upcoming paper to help maximize its impact. If they’ll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team as soon as possible -- no later than 48 hours after receiving the formal acceptance. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information, please contact onepress@plos.org.

Kind regards,

Ibrahim Jahun, MD, MSC, PhD

Academic Editor

PLOS One

Additional Editor Comments (optional):

Reviewers' comments:

Acceptance letter

Ibrahim Jahun

PONE-D-25-66140R1

PLOS One

Dear Dr. Olatoregun,

I'm pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been deemed suitable for publication in PLOS One. Congratulations! Your manuscript is now being handed over to our production team.

At this stage, our production department will prepare your paper for publication. This includes ensuring the following:

* All references, tables, and figures are properly cited

* All relevant supporting information is included in the manuscript submission,

* There are no issues that prevent the paper from being properly typeset

You will receive further instructions from the production team, including instructions on how to review your proof when it is ready. Please keep in mind that we are working through a large volume of accepted articles, so please give us a few days to review your paper and let you know the next and final steps.

Lastly, if your institution or institutions have a press office, please let them know about your upcoming paper now to help maximize its impact. If they'll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team within the next 48 hours. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information, please contact onepress@plos.org.

You will receive an invoice from PLOS for your publication fee after your manuscript has reached the completed accept phase. If you receive an email requesting payment before acceptance or for any other service, this may be a phishing scheme. Learn how to identify phishing emails and protect your accounts at https://explore.plos.org/phishing.

If we can help with anything else, please email us at customercare@plos.org.

Thank you for submitting your work to PLOS ONE and supporting open access.

Kind regards,

PLOS ONE Editorial Office Staff

on behalf of

Dr. Ibrahim Jahun

Academic Editor

PLOS One

Associated Data

    This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

    Supplementary Materials

    Attachment

    Submitted filename: Response to Reviewers.docx

    pone.0350279.s001.docx (19.6KB, docx)

    Data Availability Statement

    The minimal data set and accompanying analytic materials are available at Mendeley Data via https://doi.org/10.17632/vwmmnhgsz6.1.


    Articles from PLOS One are provided here courtesy of PLOS

    RESOURCES