↓ Skip to main content

Universal Access to HIV Treatment versus Universal ‘Test and Treat’: Transmission, Drug Resistance

Overview of attention for article published in PLOS ONE, September 2012
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 (95th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (93rd percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
policy
1 policy source
twitter
25 X users
facebook
4 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
49 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
137 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
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
Universal Access to HIV Treatment versus Universal ‘Test and Treat’: Transmission, Drug Resistance & Treatment Costs
Published in
PLOS ONE, September 2012
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0041212
Pubmed ID
Authors

Bradley G. Wagner, Sally Blower

Abstract

In South Africa (SA) universal access to treatment for HIV-infected individuals in need has yet to be achieved. Currently ~1 million receive treatment, but an additional 1.6 million are in need. It is being debated whether to use a universal 'test and treat' (T&T) strategy to try to eliminate HIV in SA; treatment reduces infectivity and hence transmission. Under a T&T strategy all HIV-infected individuals would receive treatment whether in need or not. This would require treating 5 million individuals almost immediately and providing treatment for several decades. We use a validated mathematical model to predict impact and costs of: (i) a universal T&T strategy and (ii) achieving universal access to treatment. Using modeling the WHO has predicted a universal T&T strategy in SA would eliminate HIV within a decade, and (after 40 years) cost ~$10 billion less than achieving universal access. In contrast, we predict a universal T&T strategy in SA could eliminate HIV, but take 40 years and cost ~$12 billion more than achieving universal access. We determine the difference in predictions is because the WHO has under-estimated survival time on treatment and ignored the risk of resistance. We predict, after 20 years, ~2 million individuals would need second-line regimens if a universal T&T strategy is implemented versus ~1.5 million if universal access is achieved. Costs need to be realistically estimated and multiple evaluation criteria used to compare 'treatment as prevention' with other prevention strategies. Before implementing a universal T&T strategy, which may not be sustainable, we recommend striving to achieve universal access to treatment as quickly as possible. We predict achieving universal access to treatment would be a very effective 'treatment as prevention' approach and bring the HIV epidemic in SA close to elimination, preventing ~4 million infections after 20 years and ~11 million after 40 years.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 25 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 137 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Switzerland 4 3%
United States 3 2%
United Kingdom 2 1%
Tanzania, United Republic of 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Unknown 126 92%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 26 19%
Student > Master 22 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 15 11%
Student > Postgraduate 11 8%
Professor 8 6%
Other 31 23%
Unknown 24 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 55 40%
Nursing and Health Professions 13 9%
Social Sciences 10 7%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 7 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 4%
Other 18 13%
Unknown 29 21%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 27. 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 23 April 2015.
All research outputs
#1,406,886
of 25,271,884 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#17,669
of 219,230 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#8,038
of 177,225 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#285
of 4,385 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,271,884 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 94th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 219,230 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 particularly well, scoring higher than 91% 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 177,225 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 4,385 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its contemporaries.