OBJECTIVE: To ascertain the degree of loss to follow-up in a cohort and to identify its predictors. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: Human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-infected individuals without CD4 cell counts for a year or more were defined as potentially lost to follow-up (LFU). Multivariable Poisson regression models identified the risk factors for potential LFU. Multivariable logistic regression models compared demographic and clinical characteristics of those who returned for care and those permanently LFU. RESULTS: Of 16,595 patients under follow-up, 43.6% were potentially LFU at least once. Of these, 39.8% were considered permanently LFU and 60.2% were seen again after 1 year. Of 9,766 episodes when patients were potentially LFU, 59% resulted in the patient returning for care at the same clinic or at a different clinic. Compared with those permanently LFU, patients returning were more likely to have started highly active antiretroviral therapy, to have higher CD4 counts and viral loads, to be younger, and to have had more CD4 tests before LFU. They were less likely to have had a previous episode of potential LFU. CONCLUSIONS: A substantial proportion of patients in the UK Collaborative HIV Cohort study are potentially LFU. Data linkage identifies patients returning for care at different centers. Recognition of factors associated with LFU may help reduce this important source of bias in observational databases. Copyright (c) 2010 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
OBJECTIVE: To ascertain the degree of loss to follow-up in a cohort and to identify its predictors. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING:Human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-infected individuals without CD4 cell counts for a year or more were defined as potentially lost to follow-up (LFU). Multivariable Poisson regression models identified the risk factors for potential LFU. Multivariable logistic regression models compared demographic and clinical characteristics of those who returned for care and those permanently LFU. RESULTS: Of 16,595 patients under follow-up, 43.6% were potentially LFU at least once. Of these, 39.8% were considered permanently LFU and 60.2% were seen again after 1 year. Of 9,766 episodes when patients were potentially LFU, 59% resulted in the patient returning for care at the same clinic or at a different clinic. Compared with those permanently LFU, patients returning were more likely to have started highly active antiretroviral therapy, to have higher CD4 counts and viral loads, to be younger, and to have had more CD4 tests before LFU. They were less likely to have had a previous episode of potential LFU. CONCLUSIONS: A substantial proportion of patients in the UK Collaborative HIV Cohort study are potentially LFU. Data linkage identifies patients returning for care at different centers. Recognition of factors associated with LFU may help reduce this important source of bias in observational databases. Copyright (c) 2010 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Authors: Elvin H Geng; David V Glidden; David R Bangsberg; Mwebesa Bosco Bwana; Nicholas Musinguzi; Denis Nash; John Z Metcalfe; Constantin T Yiannoutsos; Jeffrey N Martin; Maya L Petersen Journal: Am J Epidemiol Date: 2012-02-03 Impact factor: 4.897
Authors: Margaret T May; Robert S Hogg; Amy C Justice; Bryan E Shepherd; Dominique Costagliola; Bruno Ledergerber; Rodolphe Thiébaut; M John Gill; Ole Kirk; Ard van Sighem; Michael S Saag; Gemma Navarro; Paz Sobrino-Vegas; Fiona Lampe; Suzanne Ingle; Jodie L Guest; Heidi M Crane; Antonella D'Arminio Monforte; Jörg J Vehreschild; Jonathan A C Sterne Journal: Int J Epidemiol Date: 2012-11-12 Impact factor: 7.196
Authors: Edward M Gardner; Margaret P McLees; John F Steiner; Carlos Del Rio; William J Burman Journal: Clin Infect Dis Date: 2011-03-15 Impact factor: 9.079
Authors: S Krishnan; K Wu; M Smurzynski; R J Bosch; C A Benson; A C Collier; M K Klebert; J Feinberg; S L Koletar Journal: HIV Clin Trials Date: 2011 Jul-Aug
Authors: Hamish McManus; Kathy Petoumenos; Katherine Brown; David Baker; Darren Russell; Tim Read; Don Smith; Lynne Wray; Michelle Giles; Jennifer Hoy; Andrew Carr; Matthew G Law Journal: Antivir Ther Date: 2014-11-07
Authors: Muktar H Aliyu; Meridith Blevins; Karen M Megazzini; Deidra D Parrish; Carolyn M Audet; Naomi Chan; Chisom Odoh; Usman I Gebi; Mukhtar Y Muhammad; Bryan E Shepherd; C William Wester; Sten H Vermund Journal: Int Health Date: 2015-05-25 Impact factor: 2.473
Authors: Margaret May; Mark Gompels; Valerie Delpech; Kholoud Porter; Frank Post; Margaret Johnson; David Dunn; Adrian Palfreeman; Richard Gilson; Brian Gazzard; Teresa Hill; John Walsh; Martin Fisher; Chloe Orkin; Jonathan Ainsworth; Loveleen Bansi; Andrew Phillips; Clifford Leen; Mark Nelson; Jane Anderson; Caroline Sabin Journal: BMJ Date: 2011-10-11
Authors: Jialun Zhou; Junko Tanuma; Romanee Chaiwarith; Christopher K C Lee; Matthew G Law; Nagalingeswaran Kumarasamy; Praphan Phanuphak; Yi-Ming A Chen; Sasisopin Kiertiburanakul; Fujie Zhang; Saphonn Vonthanak; Rossana Ditangco; Sanjay Pujari; Jun Yong Choi; Tuti Parwati Merati; Evy Yunihastuti; Patrick C K Li; Adeeba Kamarulzaman; Van Kinh Nguyen; Thi Thanh Thuy Pham; Poh Lian Lim Journal: AIDS Res Treat Date: 2012-02-22
Authors: Franziska Schöni-Affolter; Olivia Keiser; Albert Mwango; Jeffrey Stringer; Bruno Ledergerber; Lloyd Mulenga; Heiner C Bucher; Andrew O Westfall; Alexandra Calmy; Andrew Boulle; Namwinga Chintu; Matthias Egger; Benjamin H Chi Journal: PLoS One Date: 2011-12-19 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Susie E Huntington; Loveleen K Bansi; Claire Thorne; Jane Anderson; Marie-Louise Newell; Graham P Taylor; Deenan Pillay; Teresa Hill; Pat A Tookey; Caroline A Sabin Journal: BMC Med Res Methodol Date: 2012-07-28 Impact factor: 4.615