Does treatment collection and observation each day keep the patient away? An analysis of the determinants of adherence among patients with Tuberculosis in South Africa
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Directly observed treatment short course (DOTS) has been the recommended strategy for Tuberculosis (TB) control since 1995. Developed as an alternative to inpatient treatment, it involves observation of patients' medication intake to promote adherence. However, the burden of daily clinic visits may affect access to care. Using a mixed methods approach, we consider whether (1) non-adherence differs systematically between patients required to make daily clinic visits and patients cared for under less frequent clinic visits and (2) the association between frequency of required clinic visits and adherence depends on affordability and acceptability of care. Data were collected in facility exit interviews with 1200 TB patients in two rural and two urban sub-districts in South Africa. Additionally, 17 in-depth interviews were completed with TB patients. After controlling for socioeconomic and demographic factors, patient type (new or retreatment) and treatment duration, regression analyses showed that daily attending patients were over twice as likely to report a missed clinic visit (P < 0.001) or a missed dose of treatment (P = 0.002) compared with patients required to attend clinics for treatment collection less frequently. Missed visits increased with treatment duration (P = 0.01). The significant interaction between clinic visit frequency and treatment duration indicated that sustaining daily visits over time may become increasingly difficult over the course of treatment. The qualitative analysis identified treatment cost and duration, patients' physical condition and varying social contexts (family, community and work) as important influences on adherence. These findings suggest that strategies involving daily clinic visits may require reconsideration if resources for TB care are to be used efficiently. The adoption of approaches that place patient interests at the centre of TB treatment delivery would appear to be of high priority, particularly in countries where TB prevalence is high and resources for TB care are highly constrained.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.017 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".