MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3204409293 · doi:10.5588/pha.20.0082

Experiences with latent TB cascade of care strengthening for household contacts in Calgary, Canada

2021· article· en· W3204409293 on OpenAlexaffabout
Nancy Bedingfield, Leila Barss, Olivia Oxlade, Dick Menzies, Dina Fisher

Bibliographic record

VenuePublic Health Action · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTuberculosis Research and Epidemiology
Canadian institutionsFoothills Medical CentreHealth Sciences CentreMcGill University Health CentreUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineLatent tuberculosisFamily medicineNursingTuberculosisMycobacterium tuberculosis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

SETTING: Identification, assessment, and treatment of latent TB infection (LTBI), collectively known as the LTBI cascade of care, is critical for TB prevention. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this research, conducted within the ACT4 trial, was to assess and strengthen the LTBI cascade of care for household contacts at Calgary TB Services, a clinic serving a predominately foreign-born population in Western Canada. DESIGN: Baseline assessment consisted of a retrospective LTBI cascade analysis of 32 contact investigations, and questionnaires administered to patients and health care workers. Four solutions were implemented in response to identified gaps. Solution impact was measured for 6 months using descriptive statistics. RESULTS: Pre-implementation, 56% of household contacts initiated treatment. Most contacts were lost to care because the tuberculin skin test (TST) was not initiated, or physicians did not recommend treatment. Evening clinics, a patient education pamphlet, a nursing workshop, and treatment recommendation guidelines were implemented. Post-implementation, losses due to LTBI treatment non-recommendation were reduced; however, the overall proportion of household contacts initiating treatment did not increase. CONCLUSION: Close engagement between researchers and TB programmes can reduce losses in the LTBI cascade. To see sustained improvement in overall outcomes, long-term engagement and data collection for ongoing problem-solving are required.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.305
Threshold uncertainty score0.865

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.112
GPT teacher head0.369
Teacher spread0.258 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations3
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePublic Health ActionSame topicTuberculosis Research and EpidemiologyFrench-language works237,207