↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Treatment outcomes of HIV-positive patients on first-line antiretroviral therapy in private versus public HIV clinics in Johannesburg, South Africa

Overview of attention for article published in Clinical Epidemiology, March 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (75th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (83rd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
11 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
16 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
96 Mendeley
Title
Treatment outcomes of HIV-positive patients on first-line antiretroviral therapy in private versus public HIV clinics in Johannesburg, South Africa
Published in
Clinical Epidemiology, March 2016
DOI 10.2147/clep.s93014
Pubmed ID
Authors

Faith Moyo, Charles Chasela, Alana T Brennan, Osman Ebrahim, Ian M Sanne, Lawrence Long, Denise Evans

Abstract

Despite the widely documented success of antiretroviral therapy (ART), stakeholders continue to face the challenges of poor HIV treatment outcomes. While many studies have investigated patient-level causes of poor treatment outcomes, data on the effect of health systems on ART outcomes are scarce. We compare treatment outcomes among patients receiving HIV care and treatment at a public and private HIV clinic in Johannesburg, South Africa. This was a retrospective cohort analysis of ART naïve adults (≥18.0 years), initiating ART at a public or private clinic in Johannesburg between July 01, 2007 and December 31, 2012. Cox proportional-hazards regression was used to identify baseline predictors of mortality and loss to follow-up (>3 months late for the last scheduled visit). Generalized estimating equations were used to determine predictors of failure to suppress viral load (≥400 copies/mL) while the Wilcoxon rank-sum test was used to compare the median absolute change in CD4 count from baseline to 12 months post-ART initiation. 12,865 patients initiated ART at the public clinic compared to 610 at the private clinic. The patients were similar in terms of sex and age at initiation. Compared to public clinic patients, private clinic patients initiated ART at higher median CD4 counts (159 vs 113 cells/mm(3)) and World Health Organization stage I/II (76.1% vs 58.5%). Adjusted hazard models showed that compared to public clinic patients, private clinic patients were less likely to die (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 0.50; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.35-0.70) but were at increased risk of loss to follow-up (aHR 1.80; 95% CI 1.59-2.03). By 12 months post-ART initiation, private clinic patients were less likely to have a detectable viral load (adjusted relative risk 0.65; 95% CI 0.49-0.88) and recorded higher median CD4 change from baseline (184 cells/mm(3) interquartile range 101-300 vs 158 cells/mm(3) interquartile range 91-244), when compared to public clinic patients. We identified differences in treatment outcomes between the two HIV clinics. Findings suggest that the type of clinic at which ART patients initiate and receive treatment can have an impact on treatment outcomes. Further research is necessary to provide more conclusive results.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 11 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 96 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Ethiopia 1 1%
Zimbabwe 1 1%
Tanzania, United Republic of 1 1%
South Africa 1 1%
Unknown 92 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 19 20%
Researcher 15 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 10%
Other 9 9%
Lecturer 7 7%
Other 18 19%
Unknown 18 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 40 42%
Nursing and Health Professions 10 10%
Business, Management and Accounting 5 5%
Social Sciences 5 5%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 4 4%
Other 11 11%
Unknown 21 22%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. 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 17 May 2016.
All research outputs
#5,340,716
of 25,584,565 outputs
Outputs from Clinical Epidemiology
#217
of 780 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#75,225
of 313,048 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical Epidemiology
#2
of 6 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,584,565 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 79th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 780 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% 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 313,048 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its contemporaries.
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 4 of them.