Page 65 - SAHCS HIVMed Journal Vol 20 No 1 2019

Page 10 of 10 Review Article

Appendix 1

PubMed search strategy
1. (((((((((((((((((“HIV Infections”[Mesh]) OR “HIV”[Mesh]) OR HIV*) OR hiv-1) OR hiv-2) OR hiv1) OR hiv2) OR hiv infect*) OR human
immunodeficiency virus) OR human immune deficiency virus) OR human immuno-deficiency virus) OR human immune-deficiency
virus) OR (((human immune*) AND (deficiency virus)))) OR acquired immunodeficiency syndrome*) OR acquired immune deficiency
syndrome*) OR acquired immuno-deficiency syndrome) OR acquired immune-deficiency syndrome) OR (((acquired immun*) AND
(deficiency syndrome)))
2. ((((((((((“anti-HIV agents”[MeSH]) OR “antiretroviral therapy, highly active”[MeSH]) OR HAART) OR cART) OR ART) OR antiretroviral)
OR anti-retroviral) OR anti-viral) OR antiviral) OR antiviral therapy) OR ARV
3. ((((((((((((((((((((((((((“patient compliance”[MeSH]) OR “lost to follow-up”[MeSH]) OR “treatment outcome”[MeSH]) OR “treatment
refusal”[MeSH]) OR “continuity of patient care”[MeSH]) OR retention) OR nonadherence) OR non-adherence) OR adherence) OR
noncompliance) OR non-compliance) OR follow-up) OR patient monitoring) OR attrition) OR patient elopement) OR retain*) OR (((loss*)
and “follow-up”))) OR LTFU) OR “loss to care”) OR “lost to follow-up”) OR “loss to follow-up”) OR “lost to care”) OR “loss to program*”)
OR “lost to program*”) OR default*) OR engage*) OR disengage*
4. (“South African”) OR “South Africa*”
5. #1 AND #2 AND #3 AND #4

Appendix 2

TABLE 1-A2: Modified Newcastle-Ottawa Scale.
Question Options
Is the exposed cohort representative of the 1. Yes, definitely representative of the clinic population
clinic population? 2. Yes, probably representative of the clinic population (exclusions based on convenience or missing data were <10% of total eligible
population)
3. No; selected group of users
4. Unclear; or no description of the derivation of the cohort
Was starting ART ascertained using 1. Yes; secure medical records
reliable data? 2. No
3. Unclear; or no description
Did study ascertain and record death? 1. Yes
2. No
Was assessment of outcome independent? 1. Yes, record linkage
2. No
3. Unclear, or no description
Was follow-up long enough for outcomes to 1. Yes, definitely; Median follow-up > 3 years
occur? 2. Yes, probably; Median follow-up 1–3 years
3. No; Median follow-up < 1 year
4. Unclear length of follow-up
Was missing data minimal and accounted for? 1. Yes, definitely; complete data – all subjects/records accounted for
(e.g. how many patients could be classified as 2. Yes, probably; missing data unlikely to introduce bias – small number lost – < 10% related to data on LTFU or death outcomes
in care or LTFU?) (or description provided of those missing)
3. No; missing data > 10% and or no description of those missing
4. Unclear; no statement
Source: Ottawa Hospital Research Institute. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) for assessing the quality of nonrandomised studies in meta-analyses. 2019. [cited 2019 Sep 2]. Available from:
http://www.ohri.ca/programs/clinical_epidemiology/oxford.asp
LTFU, loss to follow-up; ART, antiretroviral therapy.

http://www.sajhivmed.org.za 58 Open Access