↓ Skip to main content

Lamivudine plus tenofovir combination therapy versus lamivudine monotherapy for HBV/HIV coinfection: a meta-analysis

Overview of attention for article published in Virology Journal, September 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
3 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
2 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
8 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
Lamivudine plus tenofovir combination therapy versus lamivudine monotherapy for HBV/HIV coinfection: a meta-analysis
Published in
Virology Journal, September 2018
DOI 10.1186/s12985-018-1050-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Aoran Luo, Xiaoyan Jiang, Hong Ren

Abstract

Currently, there is no consensus on the efficacy and safety of lamivudine (LAM) plus tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) combination therapy versus lamivudine monotherapy in HBV/HIV coinfected patients. A comprehensive literature search was performed in English and Chinese databases. Both relevant dichotomous and continuous variables were extracted, and the combined outcomes were expressed as a risk ratio (RR) or a standard mean difference (SMD). Eleven eligible studies were included in our analysis. For HBV-relevant outcomes, the proportion of patients with undetectable HBV, the rates of serum alanine aminotransferase (ALT) normalization and hepatitis B e antigen (HBeAg) loss were higher in the combination therapy group than the monotherapy group (RR = 1.42, 95% CI: 1.14-1.76, P = 0.002; RR = 1.36, 95% CI: 1.17-1.58, P < 0.0001; RR = 2.74, 95% CI: 1.20-6.22, P = 0.02). In addition, the rate of HIV RNA-negative conversion was higher in the combination therapy group than the monotherapy group (RR = 1.26, 95% CI: 1.11-1.42, P = 0.0003). LAM plus TDF combination therapy was more efficacious than LAM monotherapy in HBV/HIV coinfected patients. As time passes, this difference becomes more pronounced.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 8 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 8 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Postgraduate 3 38%
Unspecified 2 25%
Other 1 13%
Researcher 1 13%
Student > Master 1 13%
Other 0 0%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Unspecified 3 38%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 13%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 13%
Psychology 1 13%
Decision Sciences 1 13%
Other 1 13%

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 24 September 2018.
All research outputs
#7,634,079
of 13,549,479 outputs
Outputs from Virology Journal
#990
of 2,197 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#130,550
of 263,021 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Virology Journal
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 13,549,479 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,197 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 263,021 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% 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