Risk and Timing of Tuberculosis Among Close Contacts of Persons with Infectious Tuberculosis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: The risk and timing of tuberculosis among recently exposed close contacts of patients with infectious tuberculosis are not well established. Methods: We prospectively enrolled patients ≥15 years of age with culture-confirmed pulmonary tuberculosis and their close contacts at 9 health departments in the United States and Canada. Close contacts were screened and cross-matched with tuberculosis registries to identify those who developed tuberculosis. Results: Tuberculosis was diagnosed in 158 of 4490 contacts (4%) of 718 index patients with tuberculosis. Of tuberculosis cases among contacts, cumulative totals of 81 (51%), 119 (75%), 128 (81%), and 145 (92%) were diagnosed by 1, 3, 6, and 12 months, respectively, after the index patients' diagnosis. Tuberculosis rates among contacts were 2644, 115, 46, 69, and 25 cases per 100000 persons, respectively, in the 5 consecutive years after the index patients' diagnosis. Of the tuberculosis cases among contacts, 121 (77%) were identified by contact investigation and 37 (23%) by tuberculosis registry cross-match. Conclusions: Close contacts to infectious patients with tuberculosis had high rates of tuberculosis, with most disease diagnosed before or within 3 months after the index patient' diagnosis. Contact investigations need to be prompt to detect tuberculosis and maximize the opportunity to identify and treat latent infection, to prevent disease.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".