ArticleBMC public health2025
Improving estimators of HIV mortality and retention in care by linking clinical cohort data with national registries in Mexico.
Article in BMC public health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Multifactorial determinants of lost to follow-up in antiretroviral therapy: evidence from a case-control study in Mexico.AIDS research and therapy · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionLoss to follow-up (LTFU) bias mortality estimates in cohort studies. This study aimed to estimate the corrected incidence of LTFU, retention in care, and mortality rates in people with HIV (PWH) in an HIV/AIDS Clinic in Mexico City, by linking clinic and national registry data, and to identify characteristics associated with LTFU.
methodsWe linked adult PWH who met lost to follow-up criteria while enrolled at a Mexico City clinic with the national death registry, a national administrative HIV database and a clinical national registry in May 2019 and January 2021. We defined lost to follow-up as absence of a documented clinical contact in the previous 180 days. We estimated corrected LTFU, retention in care, mortality rates, and survival, and identified characteristics associated to LTFU.
resultsAmong 2,826 PWH followed by a median of 5.9 years (IQR: 1.9-7.1), 804 (28.4%) were lost and 149 (5.3%) died. After the second linkage, of the 804 lost, 257 (32%) died, 175 (21.8%) transferred, 40 (4.9%) were retained in care, and 332 (41.3%) remained LTFU. Post second linkage, the corrected cumulative proportion of LTFU slightly decreased (n = 764, 27%), but deaths substantially increased (n = 459, 16.2%). A subset of PWH transferred to other centres (n = 184, 6.5%). The unadjusted LTFU rate decreased from 4.0 to 2.9 per 100 person-years (PY), while mortality increased from 0.7 to 1.7 per 100 PY. Younger age (aHR 1.5, 95%CI 1.38-1.63 per 10-year change), and lower education (aHR 1.05, 95%CI 1.01-1.08 per year) were associated to a higher risk of LTFU.
conclusionDatasets linkages revealed mortality rates three times higher than the original estimates, highlighting the limitations of relying in single-source data. At the individual level, identifying predictors of LTFU can help target interventions to improve retention and may reduce mortality. However, at the system-level, our study demonstrates the feasibility and value of cross-institutional data linkage in fragmented health systems. Key lessons include the importance of long-term, privacy-preserving data-sharing collaboration between institutions to improve patient tracking across institutions, mortality surveillance and care continuity.
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.