↓ Skip to main content

Cost-effectiveness of early initiation of first-line combination antiretroviral therapy in Uganda

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Public Health, September 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
14 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
63 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
Cost-effectiveness of early initiation of first-line combination antiretroviral therapy in Uganda
Published in
BMC Public Health, September 2012
DOI 10.1186/1471-2458-12-736
Pubmed ID
Authors

Joseph Sempa, Mark Ssennono, Andreas Kuznik, Mohammed Lamorde, Stefanie Sowinski, Aggrey Semeere, Sabine Hermans, Barbara Castelnuovo, Yukari C Manabe

Abstract

Ugandan national guidelines recommend initiation of combination antiretroviral therapy (cART) at CD4+ T cell (CD4) count below 350 cell/μl, but the implementation of this is limited due to availability of medication. However, cART initiation at higher CD4 count increases survival, albeit at higher lifetime treatment cost. This analysis evaluates the cost-effectiveness of initiating cART at a CD4 count between 250-350 cell/μl (early) versus <250 cell/μl (delayed).

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 63 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 2%
United States 1 2%
South Africa 1 2%
Unknown 60 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 12 19%
Student > Master 10 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 14%
Unspecified 4 6%
Student > Postgraduate 4 6%
Other 9 14%
Unknown 15 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 15 24%
Nursing and Health Professions 7 11%
Social Sciences 6 10%
Unspecified 4 6%
Business, Management and Accounting 4 6%
Other 9 14%
Unknown 18 29%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 19 September 2012.
All research outputs
#12,859,601
of 22,675,759 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#8,902
of 14,757 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#88,959
of 169,085 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#173
of 331 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,675,759 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 14,757 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.9. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% 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 169,085 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 331 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.