Erpretation is congruent with Munro et al, who emphasise interactions between these `personal factors’ and factors emanating from the other broad components, namely, socio-economic and health service factors [27]. A similar interpretation by one of the AZD0156 cost included studies exemplifies this assertion: In explaining the `paradoxical’ observation that `those believing they have a high or above average chance of active TB without INH were more likely nonadherent’, Szakacs and colleagues draw upon this concept of interaction, stating that the influence of stigma could be one factor interfering with the translation of patient understanding into positive action [26].Individual personal beliefsMunseri and colleagues substantiate the subtheme relating to fear of the side effects of INH, documenting that INH toxicity (n = 3, 13 ; peripheral neuropathy (n = 1), hepatitis (n = 2]), INH intolerance, such as nausea (n = 4, 17 ), were all reported by participants [23]. Mindachew and colleagues found, unsurprisingly, that those who developed IPT related adverse effects were 93 less likely to adhere to their prescribed doses [21]. Gust and colleagues also found that `the case non adherent group … had a greater proportion of persons who experienced any difficulty with the regimen (62(1) = 21.9, P,0.0001)’ [20]. In this line, 22 of participants in the study by Szakacs and colleagues agreed with the statement, “INH is dangerous to your health” [26]. Munseri and colleagues report that “Non completers were more likely to cite… fear of INH side effects (n = 1, 14 )” [23]. An interesting tension emerges from the study by Munseri and colleagues [23], L-660711 sodium salt site whereby fear of TB itself is reported as a major explanation for the decision to complete IPT. They observe that an understanding of the importance of IPT (n = 35, 32 ) was an important factor: “completers were more likely to … think IPT was important (100 vs. 87 , 95 CI 0.063?.197, P,0.001)” [23]. In this context, knowledge of the importance of IPT to successful maintenance of health may prove critical, as Szakacs and colleagues also report that “84 agreed that without INH, your chance of getting sick from TB is high” [26].PLOS ONE | www.plosone.orgHIV treatment and related issuesWhile the included studies include comparatively little quantitative data on many aspects of HIV treatment, some examples attest to the added complexity due to patients being treated for HIV and with preventive therapy for TB at the same time. For example, Gust and colleagues describe how “the case nonadherent group…had greater proportion of …persons who initiated ART (62(1) = 1.70, P = 0.192)” [20]. In contrast, Mosimaneotsile and colleagues report that “those receiving ART over the first 6 months were 1.41 fold more adherent” [22].Family and other social support related factorsQuantitative evidence from the included studies also attests to how family and other support mechanisms play a significant role in adherence. Munseri and colleagues quantify how completers were significantly more likely to have a family member or friend with TB “(65 vs. 12 , 95 confidence interval (CI) 0.185?0.875, P,0.03)” [23]. Furthermore, completers were “more likely to… have family approval for their decision to take IPT (97 vs. 50 , 95 CI 0.1411?.6389, P,0.001)” [23]. The spouse may be particularly influential in instigating, or at least rationalizing, non-adherence: “Non completers cited…spouse’s advice (n = 1, 14 )” [23].Erpretation is congruent with Munro et al, who emphasise interactions between these `personal factors’ and factors emanating from the other broad components, namely, socio-economic and health service factors [27]. A similar interpretation by one of the included studies exemplifies this assertion: In explaining the `paradoxical’ observation that `those believing they have a high or above average chance of active TB without INH were more likely nonadherent’, Szakacs and colleagues draw upon this concept of interaction, stating that the influence of stigma could be one factor interfering with the translation of patient understanding into positive action [26].Individual personal beliefsMunseri and colleagues substantiate the subtheme relating to fear of the side effects of INH, documenting that INH toxicity (n = 3, 13 ; peripheral neuropathy (n = 1), hepatitis (n = 2]), INH intolerance, such as nausea (n = 4, 17 ), were all reported by participants [23]. Mindachew and colleagues found, unsurprisingly, that those who developed IPT related adverse effects were 93 less likely to adhere to their prescribed doses [21]. Gust and colleagues also found that `the case non adherent group … had a greater proportion of persons who experienced any difficulty with the regimen (62(1) = 21.9, P,0.0001)’ [20]. In this line, 22 of participants in the study by Szakacs and colleagues agreed with the statement, “INH is dangerous to your health” [26]. Munseri and colleagues report that “Non completers were more likely to cite… fear of INH side effects (n = 1, 14 )” [23]. An interesting tension emerges from the study by Munseri and colleagues [23], whereby fear of TB itself is reported as a major explanation for the decision to complete IPT. They observe that an understanding of the importance of IPT (n = 35, 32 ) was an important factor: “completers were more likely to … think IPT was important (100 vs. 87 , 95 CI 0.063?.197, P,0.001)” [23]. In this context, knowledge of the importance of IPT to successful maintenance of health may prove critical, as Szakacs and colleagues also report that “84 agreed that without INH, your chance of getting sick from TB is high” [26].PLOS ONE | www.plosone.orgHIV treatment and related issuesWhile the included studies include comparatively little quantitative data on many aspects of HIV treatment, some examples attest to the added complexity due to patients being treated for HIV and with preventive therapy for TB at the same time. For example, Gust and colleagues describe how “the case nonadherent group…had greater proportion of …persons who initiated ART (62(1) = 1.70, P = 0.192)” [20]. In contrast, Mosimaneotsile and colleagues report that “those receiving ART over the first 6 months were 1.41 fold more adherent” [22].Family and other social support related factorsQuantitative evidence from the included studies also attests to how family and other support mechanisms play a significant role in adherence. Munseri and colleagues quantify how completers were significantly more likely to have a family member or friend with TB “(65 vs. 12 , 95 confidence interval (CI) 0.185?0.875, P,0.03)” [23]. Furthermore, completers were “more likely to… have family approval for their decision to take IPT (97 vs. 50 , 95 CI 0.1411?.6389, P,0.001)” [23]. The spouse may be particularly influential in instigating, or at least rationalizing, non-adherence: “Non completers cited…spouse’s advice (n = 1, 14 )” [23].