↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Magnitude of visceral leishmaniasis and poor treatment outcome among HIV patients: meta-analysis and systematic review

Overview of attention for article published in HIV/AIDS (Auckland, N.Z.), March 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (66th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
19 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
73 Mendeley
Title
Magnitude of visceral leishmaniasis and poor treatment outcome among HIV patients: meta-analysis and systematic review
Published in
HIV/AIDS (Auckland, N.Z.), March 2016
DOI 10.2147/hiv.s96883
Pubmed ID
Authors

Mekuriaw Alemayehu, Mamo Wubshet, Nebiyu Mesfin

Abstract

Visceral leishmaniasis (VL) coinfection with HIV/AIDS most often results in unfavorable responses to treatment, frequent relapses, and premature deaths. Scarce data are available, regarding the magnitude and poor treatment outcomes of VL-HIV coinfection. The main objective of this systematic review was to describe the pooled prevalence of VL and poor treatment outcome among HIV patients. Electronic databases mainly PubMed were searched. Databases, such as Google and Google scholar, were searched for gray literature. Articles were selected based on their inclusion criterion, whether they included HIV-positive individuals with VL diagnosis. STATA 11 software was used to conduct a meta-analysis of pooled prevalence of VL-HIV coinfection. Fifteen of the 150 articles fulfilled the inclusion criteria. A majority of the study participants were males between 25 years and 41 years of age. The pooled prevalence of VL-HIV coinfection is 5.2% with 95% confidence interval of (2.45-10.99). Two studies demonstrated the impact of antiretroviral treatment on reduction in relapse rate compared with patients who did not start antiretroviral treatment. One study showed that the higher the baseline CD4+ cell count (>100 cells/mL) the lower the relapse rate. Former VL episodes were identified as risk factors for relapse in two articles. In one of the articles, an earlier bout of VL remains significant in the model adjusted to other variables. The pooled prevalence of VL in HIV-infected patients is low and an earlier bout of VL and CD4+ count <100 cells/mL at the time of primary VL diagnosis are factors that predict poor treatment outcome.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 73 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Ethiopia 1 1%
Unknown 72 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 13 18%
Student > Postgraduate 8 11%
Student > Bachelor 6 8%
Researcher 5 7%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 7%
Other 10 14%
Unknown 26 36%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 16 22%
Nursing and Health Professions 9 12%
Immunology and Microbiology 6 8%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 7%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 3 4%
Other 9 12%
Unknown 25 34%
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 30 March 2016.
All research outputs
#16,188,873
of 25,584,565 outputs
Outputs from HIV/AIDS (Auckland, N.Z.)
#141
of 326 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#169,560
of 313,048 outputs
Outputs of similar age from HIV/AIDS (Auckland, N.Z.)
#3
of 6 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,584,565 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 326 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 51% 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 is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% 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.