MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W4214594253 · doi:10.4103/lungindia.lungindia_653_21

V-shaped recovery of tuberculosis notification trend amid COVID-19: Is it enough?

2022· letter· en· W4214594253 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff
R. Nath, Neeraj Gupta, Nitesh Gupta, Pranav Ish

Notice bibliographique

RevueLung India · 2022
Typeletter
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiqueTuberculosis Research and Epidemiology
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésMedicineTuberculosisIncidence (geometry)PandemicCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Public healthCoinfectionQuarter (Canadian coin)DemographyPediatricsEnvironmental healthFamily medicineHuman immunodeficiency virus (HIV)DiseaseInternal medicineInfectious disease (medical specialty)GeographyNursingPathology

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Sir, The mandatory notification of tuberculosis (TB) in India has a pivotal role toward achieving the national target of TB elimination in India by 2025. However, COVID-19 pandemic led to a sharp decline in the notification of TB cases for the second consecutive year as evident from the Nikshay Dashboard [Figure 1] followed by a V-shaped recovery.[1]Figure 1: Timeline of tuberculosis notification for 2018–2021 till October 2021 in India (Source: Nikshay Dashboard), and till the third quarter of the year in the United Kingdom (UK) (Source: Public Health England)The fall in TB cases initially could have been because of decreased notification or actual decrease in incidence, with the former being more plausible. Similarly, the rise of notification in the latter part could have been due to the delayed reporting or an actual increase in incidence of TB. In fact, the sharp rise in TB notification in 2021 after the second wave of COVID-19 pandemic (in the month of June), created a national stir in India and fear regarding the increase in incidence of TB which was followed by national advisory for mandatory bidirectional screening for COVID-19 in TB and vice versa. Rampant use of steroids, immunosuppressants, and a weakened immunity due to the COVID-19 infection can be reasons behind the increase in incidence of TB.[2] COVID-19 and TB coinfection can have disastrous national health consequences with increased mortality and morbidity.[3] However, the lack of continued rise from July to August 2021 in India indicates the more likely factor being the delayed reporting of the TB cases of the previous months, and this “V-shaped recovery” can be attributed to the TB cases which we have missed during the second wave and were diagnosed later after the subsequent decrease in COVID cases. Thus, the national authorities in India subsequently issued a statement that there is not enough evidence to suggest an increase in TB cases due to COVID-19.[3] Such patterns of decline and recovery in TB notification were also seen in the United Kingdom [Figure 1] in 2020 during the COVID-19 peak. However, in 2021, the notification of TB did not show any fall despite recurrent COVID-19 peaks due to intensified administrative and medical efforts in the United Kingdom. It is also interesting to see from Figure 1 that even after this (episodic) V-shaped rise in the notification of TB cases over the past 2 years in India, we are still lagging far behind our target of detecting 3,00,000 cases/month, i.e., 3.6 million cases annually as laid out in the National Strategic Plan for TB Elimination (2017–2025).[4] The COVID-19 definitely caused major disruptions in TB notification, however, the annual curve is also showing a falling trend over the past 4 years which needs to be rapidly targeted. To conclude, it is a long journey toward the elimination of TB from the Indian subcontinent, especially amid COVID-led disruption of health services. However, with the intensified efforts to mitigate the impact of COVID-19 pandemic, the missing cases have been brought into notification, not once but twice. It is imperative that TB is not forgotten or ignored in these pandemic times and constant efforts are intensified in the diagnosis, notification, treatment, and cure of TB.[3] Financial support and sponsorship Nil. Conflicts of interest There are no conflicts of interest.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,001
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesMéta-épidémiologie (sens strict), Intégrité de la recherche, Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Sans objet · Signal consensuel: Sans objet
GenreSignal candidat: Commentaire · Signal consensuel: Commentaire
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,024
Score d'incertitude au seuil1,000

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0010,002
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0010,001
Bibliométrie0,0010,001
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0010,003
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0240,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,050
Tête enseignante GPT0,355
Écart entre enseignants0,305 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Devis d'étudeSans objet
Domainenon disponible
GenreCommentaire

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations5
Publié2022
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueLung IndiaMême sujetTuberculosis Research and EpidemiologyTravaux en français237 207