↓ Skip to main content

A retrospective cohort study of body mass index and survival in HIV infected patients with and without TB co-infection

Overview of attention for article published in Infectious Diseases of Poverty, April 2018
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter

Citations

dimensions_citation
12 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
53 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
A retrospective cohort study of body mass index and survival in HIV infected patients with and without TB co-infection
Published in
Infectious Diseases of Poverty, April 2018
DOI 10.1186/s40249-018-0418-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Kogieleum Naidoo, Nonhlanhla Yende-Zuma, Stanton Augustine

Abstract

High early morbidity and mortality following antiretroviral therapy (ART) initiation has been a distinguishing feature of ART programmes in resource limited settings (RLS) compared to high-income countries. This study assessed how well body mass index (BMI: kg/m2) correlated with survival among HIV infected patients with and without TB co-infection. We retrospectively evaluated clinical data from 1000 HIV infected patients, among whom 389 were also co-infected with TB, between January 2008 and December 2010, in KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa. Among 948 patients eligible for analysis, 15.7% (149/948) were underweight (< 18.50), 55.9% (530/948) had normal BMI (≥18.50-24.90), 18.7% (177/948) were overweight (25.00-29.00) and 9.7% (92/948) were obese (≥30.00). Irrespective of TB status, underweight patients, had significantly higher risk of death compared to those with normal BMI at baseline (aHR = 2.9; 95% CI: 1.5-5.7; P = 0.002). Irrespective of TB co-infection, low BMI correlated with mortality in HIV infected patients. UKZN Biomedical Research Ethics Committee Reference number E 248/05, 23 September 2005.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 53 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 53 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 11 21%
Researcher 7 13%
Student > Postgraduate 5 9%
Other 4 8%
Student > Bachelor 3 6%
Other 8 15%
Unknown 15 28%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 21 40%
Nursing and Health Professions 6 11%
Immunology and Microbiology 5 9%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 4%
Social Sciences 2 4%
Other 2 4%
Unknown 15 28%

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 01 June 2018.
All research outputs
#11,570,500
of 13,020,439 outputs
Outputs from Infectious Diseases of Poverty
#404
of 452 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#234,011
of 269,870 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Infectious Diseases of Poverty
#5
of 6 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 13,020,439 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 452 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.1. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 269,870 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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.