The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Initiating Antiretroviral Therapy for HIV at a Patient’s First Clinic Visit: The RapIT Randomized Controlled Trial
Open accessAbstract
BACKGROUND: High rates of patient attrition from care between HIV testing and antiretroviral therapy (ART) initiation have been documented in sub-Saharan Africa, contributing to persistently low CD4 cell counts at treatment initiation. One reason for this is that starting ART in many countries is a lengthy and burdensome process, imposing long waits and multiple clinic visits on patients. We estimated the effect on uptake of ART and viral suppression of an accelerated initiation algorithm that allowed treatment-eligible patients to be dispensed their first supply of antiretroviral medications on the day of their first HIV-related clinic visit. METHODS AND FINDINGS: RapIT (Rapid Initiation of Treatment) was an unblinded randomized controlled trial of single-visit ART initiation in two public sector clinics in South Africa, a primary health clinic (PHC) and a hospital-based HIV clinic. Adult (≥18 y old), non-pregnant patients receiving a positive HIV test or first treatment-eligible CD4 count were randomized to standard or rapid initiation. Patients in the rapid-initiation arm of the study ("rapid arm") received a point-of-care (POC) CD4 count if needed; those who were ART-eligible received a POC tuberculosis (TB) test if symptomatic, POC blood tests, physical exam, education, counseling, and antiretroviral (ARV) dispensing. Patients in the standard-initiation arm of the study ("standard arm") followed standard clinic procedures (three to five additional clinic visits over 2-4 wk prior to ARV dispensing). Follow up was by record review only. The primary outcome was viral suppression, defined as initiated, retained in care, and suppressed (≤400 copies/ml) within 10 mo of study enrollment. Secondary outcomes included initiation of ART ≤90 d of study enrollment, retention in care, time to ART initiation, patient-level predictors of primary outcomes, prevalence of TB symptoms, and the feasibility and acceptability of the intervention. A survival analysis was conducted comparing attrition from care after ART initiation between the groups among those who initiated within 90 d. Three hundred and seventy-seven patients were enrolled in the study between May 8, 2013 and August 29, 2014 (median CD4 count 210 cells/mm3). In the rapid arm, 119/187 patients (64%) initiated treatment and were virally suppressed at 10 mo, compared to 96/190 (51%) in the standard arm (relative risk [RR] 1.26 [1.05-1.50]). In the rapid arm 182/187 (97%) initiated ART ≤90 d, compared to 136/190 (72%) in the standard arm (RR 1.36, 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.24-1.49). Among 318 patients who did initiate ART within 90 d, the hazard of attrition within the first 10 mo did not differ between the treatment arms (hazard ratio [HR] 1.06; 95% CI 0.61-1.84). The study was limited by the small number of sites and small sample size, and the generalizability of the results to other settings and to non-research conditions is uncertain. CONCLUSIONS: Offering single-visit ART initiation to adult patients in South Africa increased uptake of ART by 36% and viral suppression by 26%. This intervention should be considered for adoption in the public sector in Africa. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01710397, and South African National Clinical Trials Register DOH-27-0213-4177.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Govindasamy, D., Ford, N., & Kranzer, K. (2012) · AIDS · doi:10.1097/qad.0b013e3283578b9b · Cited by 435
Cited by
Saag, M. S., Benson, C. A., Gandhi, R. T., Hoy, J. F., Landovitz, R. J., Mugavero, M. J., Sax, P. E., Smith, D. M., Thompson, M. A., Buchbinder, S. P., et al. (2018) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.2018.8431 · Cited by 698
Sax, P. E., Pozniak, A., Montes, M. L., Koenig, E., DeJesus, E., Stellbrink, H.-J., Antinori, A., Workowski, K., Slim, J., Reynes, J., et al. (2017) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(17)32340-1 · Cited by 396
Labhardt, N. D., Ringera, I., Lejone, T. I., Klimkait, T., Muhairwe, J., Amstutz, A., & Glass, T. R. (2018) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.2018.1818 · Cited by 266
Amanyire, G., Semitala, F. C., Namusobya, J., Katuramu, R., Kampiire, L., Wallenta, J., Charlebois, E., Camlin, C., Kahn, J., Chang, W., et al. (2016) · The Lancet HIV · doi:10.1016/s2352-3018(16)30090-x · Cited by 141
Meya, D. B., Kiragga, A. N., Nalintya, E., Morawski, B. M., Rajasingham, R., Park, B. J., Mubiru, A., Kaplan, J. E., Manabe, Y. C., Boulware, D. R., et al. (2019) · JAIDS Journal of Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndromes · doi:10.1097/qai.0000000000001894 · Cited by 47
Metadata
- Authors
- Rosen, S., Maskew, M., Fox, M. P., Nyoni, C., Mongwenyana, C., Malete, G., Sanne, I., Bokaba, D., Sauls, C., Rohr, J., & Long, L.
- Venue
- PLOS Medicine
- Publisher
- Public Library of Science (PLoS)
- Published
- 2016-05-10
- Volume
- 13
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- e1002015
- ISSN
- 1549-1277 (ISSN-L)
- 1549-1676
- OpenAlex
- W2363480212
- Cited by
- 326
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 32.48
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Initiating Antiretroviral Therapy for HIV at a Patient’s First Clinic Visit: The RapIT Randomized Controlled Trial. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1371/journal.pmed.1002015
- The paper
- Rosen, S., Maskew, M., Fox, M. P., Nyoni, C., Mongwenyana, C., Malete, G., Sanne, I., Bokaba, D., Sauls, C., Rohr, J., & Long, L. (2016). Initiating Antiretroviral Therapy for HIV at a Patient’s First Clinic Visit: The RapIT Randomized Controlled Trial. PLOS Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1002015
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.