ArticleTropical medicine & international health : TM & IH2017
Patient engagement in HIV care and treatment in Zambia, 2004-2014.
Article in Tropical medicine & international health : TM & IH, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Clinical outcomes in the era of test and treat among children living with HIV: a retrospective before/after study in Zambia.Frontiers in pediatrics · 2025Article
- Patient Transfers and Their Impact on Gaps in Clinical Care: Differences by Gender in a Large Cohort of Adults Living with HIV on Antiretroviral Therapy in South Africa.AIDS and behavior · 2021Article
- Increasing Proportion of HIV-Infected Pregnant Zambian Women Attending Antenatal Care Are Already on Antiretroviral Therapy (2010-2015).Frontiers in public health · 2019Article
- Progress in the performance of HIV early infant diagnosis services in Zambia using routinely collected data from 2006 to 2016.BMC public health · 2018Article
- Developing and implementing national health identifiers in resource limited countries: why, what, who, when and how?Global health action · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo describe engagement along the HIV continuum of care using a large network of clinics in Zambia.
methodsWe employed a practical framework to describe retention along the HIV treatment cascade, using routinely collected clinical data available in resource-constrained settings. We included health facilities in four Zambian provinces with more than 300 enrolled patients over the age of 5 years. We described attrition at each step, from HIV enrolment to 720 days after ART initiation. The population was further stratified by year of enrolment to describe temporal trends in patient engagement.
resultsFrom January 2004 to December 2014, 444 439 individuals over the age of 5 years sought HIV care at 75 eligible health facilities. Among those enrolled into HIV care, 82.1% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 79.4-84.5%) were fully assessed for ART eligibility within 180 days of enrolment and 63.6% (95% CI: 61.7-65.3) were found to be eligible for ART based on the HIV treatment guidelines at the time. Of those patients eligible for ART, 81.1% (95% CI: 79.5-82.7%) initiated ART within 180 days. Patient retention in ART programme was 81.2% (95% CI: 80.4-81.9%) at 90 days, 70.0% (95% CI: 68.7-71.2%) at 360 days and 61.6% (95% CI: 60.0-63.2%) at 720 days. We noted a steady decline in proportions assessed for ART eligibility and deemed eligible for ART in the time frame. Proportions that started ART and remained in care remained relatively consistent.
conclusionWe describe a simple approach for assessing patient engagement after enrolment into HIV care. Using limited types of data routinely available, we demonstrate an important and replicable approach to monitoring programmes in resource-constrained settings.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.