The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 154 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
| Title |
Predictors of non adherence to antiretroviral therapy at an urban HIV care and treatment center in Tanzania
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Drug, Healthcare and Patient Safety, August 2018
|
| DOI | 10.2147/dhps.s143178 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Raphael Z Sangeda, Fausta Mosha, Said Aboud, Appolinary Kamuhabwa, Guerino Chalamilla, Jurgen Vercauteren, Eric Van Wijngaerden, Eligius F Lyamuya, Anne-Mieke Vandamme |
| Abstract |
Measurement of adherence to antiretroviral therapy (ART) can serve as a proxy for virologic failure in resource-limited settings. The aim of this study was to determine the factors underlying nonadherence measured by three methods. This is a prospective longitudinal cohort of 220 patients on ART at Amana Hospital in Dar es Salaam, Tanzania. We measured adherence using a structured questionnaire combining a visual analog scale (VAS) and Swiss HIV Cohort Study Adherence Questionnaire (SHCS-AQ), pharmacy refill, and appointment keeping during four periods over 1 year. Overall adherence was calculated as the mean adherence for all time points over the 1 year of follow-up. At each time point, adherence was defined as achieving a validated cutoff for adherence previously defined for each method. The proportion of overall adherence was 86.4% by VAS, 69% by SHCS-AQ, 79.8% by appointment keeping, and 51.8% by pharmacy refill. Forgetfulness was the major reported reason for patients to skip their medications. In multivariate analysis, significant predictors to good adherence were older age, less alcohol consumption, more advanced World Health Organization clinical staging, and having a lower body mass index with odds ratio (CI): 3.11 (1.55-6.93), 0.24 (0.09-0.62), 1.78 (1.14-2.84), and 0.93 (0.88-0.98), respectively. We found relatively good adherence to ART in this setting. Barriers to adherence include young age and perception of well-being. |
Mendeley readers
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 154 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 25 | 16% |
| Student > Bachelor | 16 | 10% |
| Researcher | 13 | 8% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 10 | 6% |
| Lecturer | 7 | 5% |
| Other | 26 | 17% |
| Unknown | 57 | 37% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 32 | 21% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 18 | 12% |
| Social Sciences | 6 | 4% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 6 | 4% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 5 | 3% |
| Other | 25 | 16% |
| Unknown | 62 | 40% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 07 September 2018.
All research outputs
#15,218,808
of 25,838,141 outputs
Outputs from Drug, Healthcare and Patient Safety
#92
of 162 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#176,933
of 343,120 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Drug, Healthcare and Patient Safety
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,838,141 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 162 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.7. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 343,120 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them