↓ Skip to main content

Factors associated with loss to follow-up after occupational HIV exposure in Cape Town, South Africa: a retrospective cohort study

Overview of attention for article published in AIDS Research and Therapy, April 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
3 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
63 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
Factors associated with loss to follow-up after occupational HIV exposure in Cape Town, South Africa: a retrospective cohort study
Published in
AIDS Research and Therapy, April 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12981-017-0149-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Nectarios Sophocles Papavarnavas, Kathryn Manning, Fahd Conrad, Milah Govender, Gary Maartens

Abstract

There is limited data on factors associated with loss to follow-up (LTFU) of health care workers (HCWs) following occupational exposure to HIV, and most studies were conducted in an era when poorly tolerated antiretrovirals like zidovudine were used. A retrospective cohort study was conducted of HCWs attending a referral hospital's Occupational Health Clinic in Cape Town, South Africa for post-exposure prophylaxis (PEP) during a period when tenofovir was available. Our primary outcome was LTFU at the 3-month visit. We selected seven variables a priori for our logistic regression model and ensured there were at least 10 outcome events per variable to minimize bias. Two hundred and ninety-three folders were evaluated for descriptive analysis. LTFU worsened with successive visits: 36% at 6 weeks, 60% at 3 months, and 72% at 6 months. In multivariate analysis at the 3-month visit LTFU was associated with age (adjusted odds ratio (aOR), 0.6 per 10-year increase [95% CI, 0.5-0.9]), HCW category of doctor (aOR 2.7 [95% CI, 1.3-5.5]), and time from exposure to receiving PEP of more than 24 h (aOR 5.9 [95% CI, 1.3-26.9]). We identified factors associated with LTFU of HCWs after occupational HIV exposure, which could be used to target interventions to improve follow-up.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 63 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 63 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 17 27%
Student > Postgraduate 6 10%
Researcher 5 8%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 6%
Lecturer 4 6%
Other 13 21%
Unknown 14 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 22 35%
Nursing and Health Professions 15 24%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 3 5%
Social Sciences 2 3%
Immunology and Microbiology 1 2%
Other 3 5%
Unknown 17 27%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 22 April 2017.
All research outputs
#15,454,502
of 22,965,074 outputs
Outputs from AIDS Research and Therapy
#355
of 554 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#193,898
of 309,877 outputs
Outputs of similar age from AIDS Research and Therapy
#15
of 20 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,965,074 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 554 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.7. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% 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 309,877 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 20 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 20th percentile – i.e., 20% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.