Risk factors for treatment default in close contacts with latent tuberculous infection
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: 1) To characterize risk factors for non-completion of latent tuberculous infection treatment (LTBIT), and 2) to assess the impact of LTBIT regimens on subsequent risk of tuberculosis (TB). METHODS: Close contacts of adults aged ⩾15 years with pulmonary TB were prospectively enrolled in a multi-center study in the United States and Canada from January 2002 to December 2006. Close contacts of TB patients were screened and cross-matched with TB registries to identify those who developed active TB. RESULTS: Of 3238 contacts screened, 1714 (53%) were diagnosed with LTBI. Preventive treatment was recommended in 1371 (80%); 1147 (84%) initiated treatment, of whom 723 (63%) completed it. In multivariate analysis, study site, initial interview sites other than a home or health care setting and isoniazid preventive treatment (IPT) were significantly associated with non-completion of LTBIT. Fourteen TB cases were identified in contacts, all of whom initiated IPT: two TB cases among persons who received ⩾6 months of IPT (66 cases/100 000 person-years [py]), and nine among those who received 0-5 months (median 2 months) of IPT (792 cases/100 000 py, P < 0.001); data on duration of IPT were not available for three cases. CONCLUSION: Only 53% (723/1371) of close contacts for whom IPT was recommended actually completed treatment. Close contacts were significantly less likely to complete LTBIT if they took IPT. Less than 6 months of IPT was associated with increased risk of active TB.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".