↓ Skip to main content

Safety, Adherence and Acceptability of Intermittent Tenofovir/Emtricitabine as HIV Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis (PrEP) among HIV-Uninfected Ugandan Volunteers Living in HIV-Serodiscordant Relationships…

Overview of attention for article published in PLOS ONE, September 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (85th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (79th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
3 policy sources
twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
70 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
237 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Safety, Adherence and Acceptability of Intermittent Tenofovir/Emtricitabine as HIV Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis (PrEP) among HIV-Uninfected Ugandan Volunteers Living in HIV-Serodiscordant Relationships: A Randomized, Clinical Trial
Published in
PLOS ONE, September 2013
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0074314
Pubmed ID
Authors

Freddie M. Kibengo, Eugene Ruzagira, David Katende, Agnes N. Bwanika, Ubaldo Bahemuka, Jessica E. Haberer, David R. Bangsberg, Burc Barin, James F. Rooney, David Mark, Paramesh Chetty, Patricia Fast, Anatoli Kamali, Frances H. Priddy

Abstract

Efficacy of oral pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) in prevention of HIV acquisition has been evaluated using a daily regimen. However, adherence to long term daily medication is rarely perfect. Intermittent regimen may be a feasible alternative. Preclinical studies have demonstrated effectiveness of intermittent PrEP in SHIV prevention among animals. However, little is known about intermittent PrEP regimens.

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 237 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Tanzania, United Republic of 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Unknown 233 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 43 18%
Student > Bachelor 35 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 31 13%
Researcher 28 12%
Other 16 7%
Other 38 16%
Unknown 46 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 82 35%
Nursing and Health Professions 32 14%
Social Sciences 19 8%
Psychology 10 4%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 6 3%
Other 33 14%
Unknown 55 23%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. 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 06 October 2021.
All research outputs
#3,547,441
of 25,260,058 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#46,186
of 219,153 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#30,326
of 210,792 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#999
of 4,892 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,260,058 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 85th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 219,153 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.7. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% 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 210,792 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 85% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 4,892 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% of its contemporaries.