MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3157487954 · doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.1003628

Digital adherence technology for tuberculosis treatment supervision: A stepped-wedge cluster-randomized trial in Uganda

2021· article· en· W3157487954 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Adithya Cattamanchi, Rebecca Crowder, Alex Kityamuwesi, Noah Kiwanuka, Maureen Lamunu, Catherine Namale, Lynn Kunihira Tinka, Agnes Sanyu Nakate, Joseph Ggita, Patricia Turimumahoro, Diana Babirye, Denis Oyuku, Christopher A. Berger, Austin Tucker, Devika Patel, Amanda Sammann, Stavia Turyahabwe, David W. Dowdy, Achilles Katamba

Bibliographic record

VenuePLoS Medicine · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTuberculosis Research and Epidemiology
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersGovernment of CanadaBill and Melinda Gates FoundationUnited States Agency for International Development
KeywordsMedicineRandomized controlled trialTuberculosisOdds ratioClinical trialCulture conversionDirectly Observed TherapyCluster randomised controlled trialOddsIntention-to-treat analysisPediatricsInternal medicineLogistic regressionSputum

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Adherence to and completion of tuberculosis (TB) treatment remain problematic in many high-burden countries. 99DOTS is a low-cost digital adherence technology that could increase TB treatment completion. METHODS AND FINDINGS: We conducted a pragmatic stepped-wedge cluster-randomized trial including all adults treated for drug-susceptible pulmonary TB at 18 health facilities across Uganda over 8 months (1 December 2018-31 July 2019). Facilities were randomized to switch from routine (control period) to 99DOTS-based (intervention period) TB treatment supervision in consecutive months. Patients were allocated to the control or intervention period based on which facility they attended and their treatment start date. Health facility staff and patients were not blinded to the intervention. The primary outcome was TB treatment completion. Due to the pragmatic nature of the trial, the primary analysis was done according to intention-to-treat (ITT) and per protocol (PP) principles. This trial is registered with the Pan African Clinical Trials Registry (PACTR201808609844917). Of 1,913 eligible patients at the 18 health facilities (1,022 and 891 during the control and intervention periods, respectively), 38.0% were women, mean (SD) age was 39.4 (14.4) years, 46.8% were HIV-infected, and most (91.4%) had newly diagnosed TB. In total, 463 (52.0%) patients were enrolled on 99DOTS during the intervention period. In the ITT analysis, the odds of treatment success were similar in the intervention and control periods (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 1.04, 95% CI 0.68-1.58, p = 0.87). The odds of treatment success did not increase in the intervention period for either men (aOR 1.24, 95% CI 0.73-2.10) or women (aOR 0.67, 95% CI 0.35-1.29), or for either patients with HIV infection (aOR 1.51, 95% CI 0.81-2.85) or without HIV infection (aOR 0.78, 95% CI 0.46-1.32). In the PP analysis, the 99DOTS-based intervention increased the odds of treatment success (aOR 2.89, 95% CI 1.57-5.33, p = 0.001). The odds of completing the intensive phase of treatment and the odds of not being lost to follow-up were similarly improved in PP but not ITT analyses. Study limitations include the likelihood of selection bias in the PP analysis, inability to verify medication dosing in either arm, and incomplete implementation of some components of the intervention. CONCLUSIONS: 99DOTS-based treatment supervision did not improve treatment outcomes in the overall study population. However, similar treatment outcomes were achieved during the control and intervention periods, and those patients enrolled on 99DOTS achieved high treatment completion. 99DOTS-based treatment supervision could be a viable alternative to directly observed therapy for a substantial proportion of patients with TB. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Pan-African Clinical Trials Registry (PACTR201808609844917).

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.034

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.053
GPT teacher head0.353
Teacher spread0.300 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designRandomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations86
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePLoS MedicineSame topicTuberculosis Research and EpidemiologyFrench-language works237,207