↓ Skip to main content

Rationale, design, and methodology of a trial evaluating three models of care for HCV treatment among injection drug users on opioid agonist therapy

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Infectious Diseases, February 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (68th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (78th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
9 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
23 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
136 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
Rationale, design, and methodology of a trial evaluating three models of care for HCV treatment among injection drug users on opioid agonist therapy
Published in
BMC Infectious Diseases, February 2018
DOI 10.1186/s12879-018-2964-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Matthew J. Akiyama, Linda Agyemang, Julia H. Arnsten, Moonseong Heo, Brianna L. Norton, Bruce R. Schackman, Benjamin P. Linas, Alain H. Litwin

Abstract

People who inject drugs (PWID) constitute 60% of the approximately 5 million people in the U.S. infected with hepatitis C virus (HCV). Treatment of PWID is complex due to addiction, mental illness, poverty, homelessness, lack of positive social support, poor adherence-related skills, low motivation and knowledge, and poor access to and trust in the health care system. New direct-acting antiviral medications are available for HCV with high cure rates and few side effects. The life expectancy and economic benefits of new HCV treatments will not be realized unless we determine optimal models of care for the majority of HCV-infected patients. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the effectiveness of directly observed therapy and group treatment compared with self-administered individual treatment in a large, urban opioid agonist therapy clinic setting in the Bronx, New York. In this randomized controlled trial 150 PWID with chronic HCV were recruited from opioid agonist treatment (OAT) clinics and randomized to one of three models of onsite HCV treatment in OAT: 1) modified directly observed therapy; 2) group treatment; or 3) control - self-administered individual treatment. Participants were age 18 or older, HCV genotype 1, English or Spanish speaking, treatment naïve (or treatment experienced after 12/3/14), willing to receive HCV treatment onsite, receiving methadone or buprenorphine at the medication window at least once per week, and able to provide informed consent. Outcomes of interest include adherence (as measured by self-report and electronic blister packs), HCV treatment completion, sustained virologic response, drug resistance, and cost-effectiveness. This paper describes the design and rationale of a randomized controlled trial comparing three models of care for HCV therapy delivered in an opioid agonist treatment program. Our trial will be critical to rigorously identify models of care that result in high adherence and cure rates. Use of blister pack technology will help us determine the role of adherence in successful cure of HCV. Moreover, the trial methodology outlined here can serve as a template for the development of future programs and studies among HCV-infected drug users receiving opioid agonist therapy, as well as the cost-effectiveness of such programs. This trial was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov ( NCT01857245 ). Trial registration was obtained prospectively on May 20th, 2013.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 9 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 136 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 136 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 25 18%
Student > Master 20 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 12 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 9 7%
Student > Bachelor 8 6%
Other 16 12%
Unknown 46 34%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 33 24%
Nursing and Health Professions 11 8%
Psychology 10 7%
Social Sciences 8 6%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 5 4%
Other 17 13%
Unknown 52 38%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 09 March 2018.
All research outputs
#6,812,380
of 23,023,224 outputs
Outputs from BMC Infectious Diseases
#2,133
of 7,724 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#140,214
of 442,600 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Infectious Diseases
#32
of 149 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,023,224 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 70th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,724 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% 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 442,600 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 68% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 149 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its contemporaries.