HIV and tuberculosis in Durban, South Africa: adherence to two medication regimens
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Given that antiretroviral (ARV) medication adherence has been shown to be high in resource-limited countries, the question remains as to whether adherence will remain at that level as medications become more widely available. Comparing adherence to tuberculosis (TB) medications, which have been readily available, and ARV medications may help to indicate the likely future adherence to ARVs as access to these medications becomes more widespread. This study examined sense of coherence, social support, symptom status, quality of life, and adherence to medications in two samples of individuals being treated either for TB or human immunodeficiency virus/acquired immunodeficiency syndrome (HIV/AIDS) at clinics in Durban, South Africa. Findings revealed the distinctive socio-economic backgrounds of the two cohorts. Although there were significant differences with regard to the psychosocial variables, there were no significant differences by the two samples in adherence to medications as well as adherence to appointments. Given the self-selected nature of the participants in this study, namely those able to attend clinic, as well as those likely to be adherent to ARVs, there is every reason for caution in the interpretations of these findings. As access to ARV medications becomes more widely available in South Africa, the question remains as to whether such high adherence will be maintained given the constraints of access to food and other basic necessities.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".