↓ Skip to main content

The multi-step process of building TB/HIV collaboration in Cambodia

Overview of attention for article published in Health Research Policy and Systems, October 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 (80th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
6 X users
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Readers on

mendeley
74 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
The multi-step process of building TB/HIV collaboration in Cambodia
Published in
Health Research Policy and Systems, October 2012
DOI 10.1186/1478-4505-10-34
Pubmed ID
Authors

Mao Tan Eang, Mean Chhi Vun, Khun Kim Eam, Samreth Sovannarith, Seng Sopheap, Ngauv Bora, Rajendra Yadav, Masami Fujita, Bernard Tomas, Massimo Ghidinelli, Pieter van Maaren, William A Wells

Abstract

Tuberculosis and HIV/AIDS have synergistic health impacts in terms of disease development and progression. Therefore, collaborative TB and HIV/AIDS activities are a logical health systems response. However, the establishment of these activities presents a challenge for countries that have strong vertical disease programs that differ in their implementation philosophies. Here, we review the process by which TB/HIV collaboration was established in Cambodia. A cycle of overlapping and mutually reinforcing initiatives - local research; piloted implementation with multiple options; and several rounds of policy formulation guided by a cross-functional Technical Working Group - was used to drive nationwide introduction of a full set of TB/HIV collaborative activities. Senior Ministry of Health officials and partner organizations brought early attention to TB/HIV. Both national programs implemented initial screening and testing interventions, even in the absence of a detailed, overarching framework. The use of multiple options for HIV testing identified which programmatic options worked best, and early implementation and pilots determined what unanswered questions required further research. Local conduct of this research - on co-treatment timing and TB symptom screening - speeded adoption of the results into policy guidance, and clarified the relative roles of the two programs. Roll-out is continuing, and results for a variety of key indicators, including screening PLHIV for TB, and testing TB patients for HIV, are at 70-80% and climbing. This experience in Cambodia illustrates the influence of health research on policy, and demonstrates that clear policy guidance, the pursuit of incremental advances, and the use of different approaches to generate evidence can overcome structural barriers to change and bring direct benefits to patients.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 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 74 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Cambodia 1 1%
United Kingdom 1 1%
India 1 1%
Portugal 1 1%
Unknown 70 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 21 28%
Student > Master 12 16%
Student > Doctoral Student 7 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 7%
Other 4 5%
Other 13 18%
Unknown 12 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 25 34%
Nursing and Health Professions 10 14%
Social Sciences 7 9%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 5%
Business, Management and Accounting 3 4%
Other 9 12%
Unknown 16 22%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. 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 26 August 2022.
All research outputs
#4,513,383
of 22,788,370 outputs
Outputs from Health Research Policy and Systems
#601
of 1,213 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#33,389
of 176,021 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Health Research Policy and Systems
#4
of 8 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,788,370 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 80th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,213 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.1. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 50% 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 176,021 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 8 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 4 of them.