Treatment Outcomes and Associated Factors in TB/HIV-Co infected Patients in Namibia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study assessed the treatment outcomes of patients registered for anti-tuberculosis (TB) treatment in the Karas Region, Namibia, through a 5-year quantitative retrospective cohort study. The analysis focused on successful outcomes, including cure and treatment completion, and unsuccessful outcomes, such as death, treatment failure, default, and loss to follow-up. Data from 200 adults co-infected with TB and HIV from 2016 to 2020 were analyzed using descriptive statistics, Chi-square tests, and logistic regression, with systematic sampling applied for participant selection. Among the participants, 129 (60.0%) were cured, 30 (14.4%) completed treatment, 7 (3.4%) experienced treatment failure, 24 (11.5%) died, and 10 (4.8%) were lost to follow-up. Overall, 159 (79.5%) achieved successful treatment outcomes, while 41 (20.5%) had unsuccessful outcomes. The findings reveal that the treatment success rate in the Keetmanshoop Health District was below the World Health Organization's (WHO) recommended target of 90%, highlighting the need for targeted interventions to improve treatment adherence and outcomes in the region.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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".