Publication activity
Articles grouped by publication year
Hover over a year or focus the chart and use arrow keys to inspect values.
2026 is year to date. 0 undated publications excluded.
Research across participating journals · All insights follow your collection filters.
Publication activity alongside incoming citations.
Articles grouped by publication year
Hover over a year or focus the chart and use arrow keys to inspect values.
2026 is year to date. 0 undated publications excluded.
OpenAlex · year of the citing work
Hover over a year or focus the chart and use arrow keys to inspect values.
2017–2026 annual-history window. 2026 is year to date. Unknown years have gaps.
Leading affiliations and themes in this collection.
Full distributions & methodology ↓Independent sources. Clear time scales.
Crossref and OpenAlex · separate totals for the same publication cohorts
Hover over a year or focus the chart and use arrow keys to inspect values.
Latest lifetime totals, grouped by the cited article’s year. These are not citations received in that year.
OpenAlex · incoming citation links grouped by citing-work year
Hover over a year or focus the chart and use arrow keys to inspect values.
2017–2026 annual-history window. 2026 is year to date. Unknown years have gaps.
Select journals to compare the same collection filters. Source totals stay separate. These measures describe research activity, not journal quality.
Articles by publication year
Latest lifetime totals · grouped by publication year
Latest lifetime totals · grouped by publication year
By year of the citing work · 2017–2026
2026 is year to date. Crossref and OpenAlex lifetime charts share a citation scale. Unknown observations appear as gaps; known zero stays zero. Annual receipts use available OpenAlex histories and may not sum to lifetime totals. 0 undated publications excluded from publication-year charts.
Crossref citation coverage: 2 / 2 publications (100.0%). Latest observation: 21 Oct 2026, 07:22 UTC. Means and percentages use records with known counts.
DOI-matched OpenAlex observations for the same selected publications. These counts are separate from Crossref and are never added together.
Observation range: 21 Oct 2026 07:23 UTC — 21 Oct 2026 07:23 UTC. Missing matches are not zero citations. Previous observations may remain if a refresh fails or a DOI no longer matches.
OpenAlex affiliations and primary-topic classification. Each publication counts once per institution or country; multi-affiliated publications appear in multiple groups, so percentages can sum above 100%. Countries describe author affiliations, not nationality. Topics use one primary topic per publication.
2 / 2 with data · 0 missing or unmatched. Percentages use all 2 selected publications.
2 / 2 with data · 0 missing or unmatched. Percentages use all 2 selected publications.
2 / 2 with data · 0 missing or unmatched. Percentages use all 2 selected publications.
Citations are the latest recorded totals for articles published in each year, not citations received during that year. Crossref and OpenAlex remain separate and share the same citation scale. 2026 is incomplete; newer articles have had less time to receive citations.
0 undated publications excluded. Unknown citation counts are shown as —, never as zero. Partial coverage can understate totals; expand each table for known / total records.
| Publication year | Journal / scope | Publications | Publications | Crossref known | OpenAlex known |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2025 | All selected publications | 2 | 2 | 2/2 | 2/2 |
| Publication year | Journal / scope | Crossref citations | Publications | Crossref known | OpenAlex known |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2025 | All selected publications | 0 | 2 | 2/2 | 2/2 |
| Publication year | Journal / scope | OpenAlex citations | Publications | Crossref known | OpenAlex known |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2025 | All selected publications | 0 | 2 | 2/2 | 2/2 |
Incoming citations to the selected publications, grouped by the year of the citing work. This is separate from lifetime citation totals grouped by the cited article’s publication year.
The publication filters above define which articles receive the citations. The citation-year range below only controls this chart and the incoming-citation comparison. Removing publication-year filters includes older articles’ incoming citations too.
Annual history available for 2 / 2 selected publications. Supported display window: 2017–2026; 2026 is incomplete. Within a successfully fetched ten-year window, omitted years mean zero. Missing histories and years beyond a saved observation’s window remain unknown (—); partial coverage can understate totals.
Annual-history observations (UTC): 2026-10-21T07:23:01.314240+00:00 — 2026-10-21T07:23:02.611587+00:00. Older observations may be retained after failed or incomplete refreshes.
| Citation year | Journal / scope | OpenAlex · Citations received by year | Publications | Annual history known |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2017 | All selected publications | 0 | 2 | 2/2 |
| 2018 | All selected publications | 0 | 2 | 2/2 |
| 2019 | All selected publications | 0 | 2 | 2/2 |
| 2020 | All selected publications | 0 | 2 | 2/2 |
| 2021 | All selected publications | 0 | 2 | 2/2 |
| 2022 | All selected publications | 0 | 2 | 2/2 |
| 2023 | All selected publications | 0 | 2 | 2/2 |
| 2024 | All selected publications | 0 | 2 | 2/2 |
| 2025 | All selected publications | 0 | 2 | 2/2 |
| 2026 | All selected publications | 0 | 2 | 2/2 |
Counts represent citation links, not unique citing papers across a journal: one paper citing two selected articles contributes two links. Older citations outside this window are excluded, so annual sums need not equal lifetime totals. OpenAlex methodology ↗
Publications by publication year. 2026 is an incomplete year.
| Period | Publications |
|---|---|
| 2025 | 2 |
Latest Crossref totals for the selected publications; not citations received in the selected years.
Unknown counts are excluded from the mean, median and cited-publication rate.
Same filters, source and counting rules across journals. Descriptive statistics, not a quality ranking.
| Journal / publisher | Publications | Crossref citations | OpenAlex citations | OpenAlex coverage | Crossref mean | Crossref median | Crossref cited %* | Crossref coverage |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| International Journal of Research in Business and Social Science SSBFNET | 2 | 0 | 0 | 2/2 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 2/2 · 100.0% |
* Percentage among publications with a known citation count.
The Universal Testing and Treatment (UTT) program aimed to improve human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) outcomes by initiating immediate antiretroviral therapy (ART). However, UTT faced challenges, including high attrition rates and loss to follow-up (LTFU), particularly in South Africa, where implementation has sometimes led to increased treatment discontinuation. This study investigated HIV UTT program uptake and LTFU rates among people living with HIV (PLWHIV) in Moretele Sub-district, South Africa. A quantitative, observational retrospective design evaluated UTT effectiveness in rural HIV care. Adult clients initiating ART between January 2020 and January 2022 across nine clinics in Moretele Sub-district were included. A random sample of 500 medical records was analyzed using Tier.net and DHIS software for record identification. Data analysis using STATA 18.0 included descriptive statistics, bivariate analysis, and logistic regression to identify factors influencing retention. Of 203 records analyzed, (30.8%) were aged 30–39, and 52.8% were female. Most clients were single (61.8%) and employed (51.6%). Same-day ART initiation was high (83.8%), yet 70% were LTFU, 25% transferred, 4.4% stopped treatment, and 0.6% died. Clients aged 30–39 had higher odds of LTFU (adjusted OR = 1.77; p=0.007). Gender, marital, and income status showed no significant association. While UTT enables rapid ART initiation, high LTFU rates, especially among younger, male, and employed individuals, hinder success. Strategies to improve retention should focus on same-day initiators and community engagement. This study highlights critical challenges in UTT implementation, emphasizing the need for targeted interventions to address LTFU and enhance retention in HIV care programs.
The human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) testing services (HTS) are as important as any other healthcare service; hence clients should be encouraged to use them. The Universal Testing and Treatment (UTT) initiative is one of the ways for improving HIV outcomes by commencing rapid antiretroviral medication (ART). An explorative-descriptive qualitative study was followed to understand the motivation for accepting and utilization of HTS through the UTT strategy. The study was conducted in three selected PHC facilities around North-West province, Bojanala district, Kgetleng sub-district. Data was analysed using thematic content with the support of NVivo 12 software. Four main themes with supporting sub-themes emerged. The study findings showed that the majority of participants were not knowledgeable about or aware of the strategy until they tested positive in their clinics. HTS are still underused as participants presented to the facilities only when seriously ill, had symptoms or were pregnant. Some participants accepted their status and treatment because they were already sick and had no choice but to take treatment. Despite the different emotions, others were able to accept their treatment and status. Some disclosed and received support from family, partners and friends, while others had not. Fear of stigmatisation when seen frequently at the clinic was also noted. This article's findings can influence policymakers involved in HIV testing and UTT methods.
The Universal Testing and Treatment (UTT) program aimed to improve human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) outcomes by initiating immediate antiretroviral therapy (ART). However, UTT faced challenges, including high attrition rates and loss to follow-up (LTFU), particularly in South Africa, where implementation has sometimes led to increased treatment discontinuation. This study investigated HIV UTT program uptake and LTFU rates among people living with HIV (PLWHIV) in Moretele Sub-district, South Africa. A quantitative, observational retrospective design evaluated UTT effectiveness in rural HIV care. Adult clients initiating ART between January 2020 and January 2022 across nine clinics in Moretele Sub-district were included. A random sample of 500 medical records was analyzed using Tier.net and DHIS software for record identification. Data analysis using STATA 18.0 included descriptive statistics, bivariate analysis, and logistic regression to identify factors influencing retention. Of 203 records analyzed, (30.8%) were aged 30–39, and 52.8% were female. Most clients were single (61.8%) and employed (51.6%). Same-day ART initiation was high (83.8%), yet 70% were LTFU, 25% transferred, 4.4% stopped treatment, and 0.6% died. Clients aged 30–39 had higher odds of LTFU (adjusted OR = 1.77; p=0.007). Gender, marital, and income status showed no significant association. While UTT enables rapid ART initiation, high LTFU rates, especially among younger, male, and employed individuals, hinder success. Strategies to improve retention should focus on same-day initiators and community engagement. This study highlights critical challenges in UTT implementation, emphasizing the need for targeted interventions to address LTFU and enhance retention in HIV care programs.
The human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) testing services (HTS) are as important as any other healthcare service; hence clients should be encouraged to use them. The Universal Testing and Treatment (UTT) initiative is one of the ways for improving HIV outcomes by commencing rapid antiretroviral medication (ART). An explorative-descriptive qualitative study was followed to understand the motivation for accepting and utilization of HTS through the UTT strategy. The study was conducted in three selected PHC facilities around North-West province, Bojanala district, Kgetleng sub-district. Data was analysed using thematic content with the support of NVivo 12 software. Four main themes with supporting sub-themes emerged. The study findings showed that the majority of participants were not knowledgeable about or aware of the strategy until they tested positive in their clinics. HTS are still underused as participants presented to the facilities only when seriously ill, had symptoms or were pregnant. Some participants accepted their status and treatment because they were already sick and had no choice but to take treatment. Despite the different emotions, others were able to accept their treatment and status. Some disclosed and received support from family, partners and friends, while others had not. Fear of stigmatisation when seen frequently at the clinic was also noted. This article's findings can influence policymakers involved in HIV testing and UTT methods.
Source coverage refers to this result set; a publication may occur in several sources. Sync times refer to contributing journals.
Missing abstracts: 0 · Missing authors: 0 · Missing publication dates: 0 · Dates without day precision: 0
| Source | Most recent successful journal sync | Latest attempt |
|---|---|---|
| crossref | 21 Oct 2026 07:22 UTC · ijrbs | complete · ijrbs · 21 Oct 2026 07:22 UTC |
| ojs-rest | 21 Oct 2026 07:22 UTC · ijrbs | complete · ijrbs · 21 Oct 2026 06:46 UTC |
| oai-pmh | 20 Oct 2026 19:55 UTC · ijrbs | complete · ijrbs · 20 Oct 2026 19:50 UTC |
| openalex-enrichment | 21 Oct 2026 07:23 UTC · ijrbs | complete · ijrbs · 21 Oct 2026 07:22 UTC |