↓ Skip to main content

Effectiveness of RHZE-FDC (fixed-dose combination) compared to RH-FDC + Z for tuberculosis treatment in Brazil: a cohort study

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Infectious Diseases, February 2015
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
9 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
75 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
Effectiveness of RHZE-FDC (fixed-dose combination) compared to RH-FDC + Z for tuberculosis treatment in Brazil: a cohort study
Published in
BMC Infectious Diseases, February 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12879-015-0820-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

José Ueleres Braga, Anete Trajman

Abstract

In 2009, Brazil was the sole high-burden country to use three drugs [rifampin (R), isoniazid (H) and pyrazinamide (Z)] as the standard treatment for sensitive tuberculosis, with RH in fixed-dose combination (FDC). In December 2009, the country has adopted the FDC four-drug regimen including ethambutol (E). The rationale was the expectation to reduce default and resistance rates, by increasing adherence to treatment and avoiding monotherapy. However, there is no consensus on the superior effectiveness of the RHZE-FDC regimen over RH-FDC + Z. In particular, few studies evaluated its influence on default and smear negativation rates. We conducted a historic cohort study to assess the effectiveness of RHZE-FDC for the treatment of tuberculosis in Brazil, measured by the rates of treatment default and smear negativation in the second month of treatment, using secondary data from the national information system known as SINAN-TB. The RHZE-FDC had a protective effect against treatment default compared to RH-FDC + Z, reducing it by 14%. However, it was not possible to show an effect of the RHZE-FDC on the rate of second month smear negativation. In addition to the regimen, other well-studied individual characteristics, such as older age (over 38 years) and higher education occupation were also protective against default. Conversely, alcoholism increased the probability of defaulting. These programmatic findings suggests the benefits of RHZE-FDC over RH-FDC + Z. Our analysis of a cohort database in a high burden country shows that compared to RH-FDC + Z, RHZE-FDC reduces the default rates, independently of other influencing individual or health service factors.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 75 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Brazil 3 4%
United States 1 1%
United Kingdom 1 1%
Unknown 70 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 19 25%
Researcher 8 11%
Student > Postgraduate 6 8%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 7%
Other 15 20%
Unknown 16 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 25 33%
Nursing and Health Professions 9 12%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 5 7%
Social Sciences 4 5%
Business, Management and Accounting 3 4%
Other 10 13%
Unknown 19 25%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 22 February 2015.
All research outputs
#18,401,176
of 22,792,160 outputs
Outputs from BMC Infectious Diseases
#5,597
of 7,674 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#185,218
of 255,034 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Infectious Diseases
#110
of 159 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,792,160 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,674 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.6. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% 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 255,034 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 159 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 6th percentile – i.e., 6% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.