ArticleHIV medicine2019
Evaluation of weight-based prescription of antiretroviral therapy in children.
Article in HIV medicine, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Risk factors for HIV virological non-suppression among adolescents with common mental disorder symptoms in Zimbabwe: a cross-sectional study.Journal of the International AIDS Society · 2021Trial
- Simulation-Based Predictions to Support the Development of a Pediatric Fixed-Dose Combination of Dolutegravir/Emtricitabine/Tenofovir Alafenamide Fumarate.Clinical pharmacokinetics · 2026Review
- Rural nurses' antiretroviral prescribing practices in children, Limpopo province, South Africa.Southern African journal of HIV medicine · 2023Article
- Not yet 90-90-90: A quality improvement approach to human immunodeficiency virus viral suppression in paediatric patients in the rural Eastern Cape, South Africa.South African family practice : official journal of the South African Academy of Family Practice/Primary Care · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThe aim of the study was to investigate the extent of and factors associated with incorrect dosing of antiretroviral therapy (ART) in HIV-infected children in Harare, Zimbabwe.
methodsAll children aged 0-10 years and children aged 11-17 years who weighed < 35 kg and taking ART were recruited from the paediatric HIV clinic at Harare Hospital. Their current doses of ART drugs were compared against doses recommended by the national guidelines.
resultsAmong 309 children recruited [55% male; median age 7 years (interquartile range (IQR) 5-10 years)], the median CD4 count was 899 cells/μL and the median duration of their current ART regimen was 11.2 months (IQR 4.9-17.1 months). Overall, 110 (35.6%) children were prescribed incorrect doses of at least one drug component within their ART regimen; 64 (20.7%) under-dosed and 49 (15.9%) over-dosed on at least one drug. Children receiving a higher than recommended dose of at least one drug were younger compared with correctly dosed children (median 6 versus 7 years, respectively; P = 0.001), had been on their current ART regimen for a shorter time (median 7.2 versus 13 months, respectively; P = 0.003) and were less likely to be receiving a three-drug fixed-dose combination (FDC; 42.9 versus 63.3%, respectively; P = 0.009). Those who were under-dosed were also less likely to be on a three-drug FDC (25 versus 63.3%, respectively; P < 0.001).
conclusionsOver a third of children were prescribed incorrect doses of ART. Children taking triple-drug FDCs were likely to be correctly dosed. Our study highlights the importance of weight monitoring at each clinical contact, training of health care providers on paediatric drug dosing and the need for wider availability of FDCs for children.
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.