↓ Skip to main content

Prevalence and factors associated with use of khat: a survey of patients entering HIV treatment programs in Ethiopia

Overview of attention for article published in Addiction Science & Clinical Practice, January 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Readers on

mendeley
109 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
Prevalence and factors associated with use of khat: a survey of patients entering HIV treatment programs in Ethiopia
Published in
Addiction Science & Clinical Practice, January 2017
DOI 10.1186/s13722-016-0069-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Alan R. Lifson, Sale Workneh, Tibebe Shenie, Desalegn Admassu Ayana, Zenebe Melaku, Lemlem Bezabih, Hiwot Tekle Waktola, Behailu Dagne, Rose Hilk, Ken C. Winters, Lucy Slater

Abstract

Khat, a plant native to East Africa, has psychoactive constituents similar to amphetamine. Chronic khat use can lead to psychological dependence with multiple physical and mental health harms, complicating clinical management of people living with HIV. In two Ethiopian cities where khat is common, we evaluated prevalence and correlates of khat use among patients new to HIV care. During 2013-2014, we surveyed 322 patients recently enrolled in HIV clinics in Dire Dawa and Harar about khat use, demographics, smoking and alcohol use, clinical illness, food insecurity, and social support. We analyzed factors associated with khat use in the past year, as well as heaviest use of khat (based on greatest number of hours used in a typical month). 242 (75%) respondents reported lifetime khat use; 209 (65%) reported khat use during the previous year. 54% of khat users started before age 19 years. Although 84% believed that using khat every day is dangerous for health if you have HIV, khat was used in the previous year a median of 5 h/days and 30 days/month; 21% said they felt a need to cut down or control their khat use but had difficulty doing so. Those using khat were more likely to report smoking (46%) and alcohol use (49%) compared to non-khat users (1 and 31% respectively). Those reporting heaviest khat use (≥180 h/typical month) were more likely to rate their health status as poor, have an underweight BMI (≤18.5 kg/m(2)), report more symptoms of chronic illness, and agree with more statements indicating a negative physical quality of life. In multivariate analysis, heavy users were more likely to be male, Muslim, and non-married. Khat use was common among HIV patients entering care, and associated with symptoms of poorer physical health. Over half started khat use when they were young. Although most believed khat is harmful for HIV patients, a number of respondents reported some difficulty controlling their drug use. In settings where khat is legal and widely utilized, developing interventions for responsible use represent an important health priority as part of comprehensive care for people living with HIV.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 109 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 109 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 14 13%
Student > Bachelor 11 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 10%
Researcher 10 9%
Lecturer 7 6%
Other 16 15%
Unknown 40 37%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 15 14%
Medicine and Dentistry 14 13%
Psychology 10 9%
Business, Management and Accounting 4 4%
Social Sciences 4 4%
Other 13 12%
Unknown 49 45%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 11 January 2017.
All research outputs
#15,168,964
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Addiction Science & Clinical Practice
#313
of 487 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#224,831
of 421,515 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Addiction Science & Clinical Practice
#6
of 6 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 487 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 17.6. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 421,515 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 6 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.