Islands of Tuberculosis Elimination: An Evaluation of Community-Based Active Case Finding in North Sumatra, Indonesia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Community-based active case finding (ACF) is needed to reach key/vulnerable populations with limited access to tuberculosis (TB) care. Published reports of ACF interventions in Indonesia are scarce. We conducted an evaluation of a multicomponent community-based ACF intervention as it scaled from one district to nine in Nias and mainland North Sumatra. Community and health system support measures including laboratory strengthening, political advocacy, sputum transport, and community awareness were instituted. ACF was conducted in three phases: pilot (18 months, 1 district), intervention (12 months, 4 districts) and scale-up (9 months, 9 districts). The pilot phase identified 215 individuals with bacteriologically positive (B+) TB, representing 42% of B+ TB notifications. The intervention phase yielded 509, representing 54% of B+ notifications and the scale-up phase identified 1345 individuals with B+ TB (56% of notifications). We observed large increases in B+ notifications on Nias, but no overall change on the mainland despite district variation. Overall, community health workers screened 377,304 individuals of whom 1547 tested positive, and 95% were initiated on treatment. Our evaluation shows that multicomponent community-based ACF can reduce the number of people missed by TB programs. Community-based organizations are best placed for accessing and engaging hard to reach populations and providing integrated support which can have a large positive effect on TB notifications.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.007 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".