↓ Skip to main content

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Effectiveness and safety of first‐line tenofovir + emtricitabine + efavirenz for patients with HIV

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, May 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (81st percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (53rd percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet

Citations

dimensions_citation
2 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
39 Mendeley
Title
Effectiveness and safety of first‐line tenofovir + emtricitabine + efavirenz for patients with HIV
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, May 2012
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd007276.pub3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Innocent Omeje, Charles I Okwundu

Abstract

The current recommended antiretroviral treatment is a highly active antiretroviral therapy (HAART). Although HAART has been associated with improved clinical response to treatment, issues of adherence and viral resistance are major challenges limiting its success. There is a need for an effective and safe first-line regimen, to cope with the ever-increasing incidence of non-adherence and primary resistance. A more recent first-line treatment regimen consists of Tenofovir (TDF, 300 mg) + Emtricitabine (FTC, 200 mg) + Efavirenz (EFV, 600 mg). To evaluate the effects and safety of TDF + FTC + EFV as first-line treatment for patients with HIV. We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, EMBASE, GATEWAY, LILACS, PubMed, AEGIS, and the WHO prospective clinical trials registry in November 2011. Randomized controlled trials evaluating the effects of TDF + FTC + EFV compared with other HAART regimens. Two reviewers independently assessed trial eligibility and risk of bias, and extracted data from the included study. Only one study involving 517 antiretroviral-naive HIV infected adults was included in this review. Participants were randomly assigned to receive either a regimen of TDF (300 mg), FTC (200mg), and EFV (600mg ) once daily; or a regimen of fixed-dose zidovudine (AZT) (300 mg) and lamivudine (3TC) (150 mg) twice daily plus EFV (600mg) once daily. Significantly more patients in the TDF-FTC group reached and maintained HIV RNA levels of less than 50 copies per milliliter compared to the AZT- 3TC group (RR 1.13; 95% CI 1.02 to 1.25). Also, more participants in the TDF-FTC group had greater increase from baseline CD4 cell counts compared to the AZT-3TC group (190 vs. 158 cells per mm(3)). More patients in the AZT-3TC group than in the TDF-FTC group had adverse events resulting in discontinuation of the study drugs (9% vs. 4%, respectively; P = 0.02). There was no statistically significant difference in all cause mortality (RR 0.50; 95% CI 0.05 to 5.46). Only one trial has shown beneficial effects and safety of TDF+ FTC + EFV as first-line treatment for patients with HIV. The effects and safety of TDF + FTC + EFV as first-line treatment for patients with HIV cannot be assessed on the basis of only one trial. Further studies evaluating the effects and safety of TDF + FTC + EFV as first-line treatment for patients with HIV are needed.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 39 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Ethiopia 1 3%
France 1 3%
Unknown 37 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 12 31%
Researcher 5 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 10%
Librarian 2 5%
Student > Postgraduate 2 5%
Other 8 21%
Unknown 6 15%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 21 54%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 5%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 5%
Linguistics 1 3%
Computer Science 1 3%
Other 5 13%
Unknown 7 18%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. 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 24 July 2017.
All research outputs
#5,049,844
of 26,205,030 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#7,251
of 13,193 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#31,838
of 178,063 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#85
of 189 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,205,030 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 79th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 13,193 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 34.8. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% 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 178,063 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 189 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 53% of its contemporaries.