MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4386208119 · doi:10.1016/s1473-3099(23)00375-4

Improving measurement of tuberculosis care cascades to enhance people-centred care

2023· review· en· W4386208119 on OpenAlexafffund
Lena Faust, Pren Naidoo, Guillermo Caceres-Cardenas, César Ugarte‐Gil, Monde Muyoyeta, Andrew D. Kerkhoff, Karikalan Nagarajan, Srinath Satyanarayana, Niaina Rakotosamimanana, Simon Grandjean Lapierre, Olusola Adedeji Adejumo, Joseph Kuye, Charity Oga‐Omenka, Madhukar Pai, Ramnath Subbaraman

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Lancet Infectious Diseases · 2023
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTuberculosis Research and Epidemiology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of WaterlooCentre Hospitalier de l’Université de MontréalMcGill UniversityUniversité de MontréalMcGill University Health Centre
FundersNational Institute of Allergy and Infectious DiseasesCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchCanada Research ChairsBill and Melinda Gates FoundationDoris Duke Charitable Foundation
KeywordsTuberculosisHealth careDiseaseMedicinePublic healthPopulationEconomic growthEnvironmental healthNursingEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Care cascades represent the proportion of people reaching milestones in care for a disease and are widely used to track progress towards global targets for HIV and other diseases. Despite recent progress in estimating care cascades for tuberculosis (TB) disease, they have not been routinely applied at national and subnational levels, representing a lost opportunity for public health impact. As researchers who have estimated TB care cascades in high-incidence countries (India, Madagascar, Nigeria, Peru, South Africa, and Zambia), we describe the utility of care cascades and identify measurement challenges, including the lack of population-based disease burden data and electronic data capture, the under-reporting of people with TB navigating fragmented and privatised health systems, the heterogeneity of TB tests, and the lack of post-treatment follow-up. We outline an agenda for rectifying these gaps and argue that improving care cascade measurement is crucial to enhancing people-centred care and achieving the End TB goals.

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)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.930
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.076
GPT teacher head0.387
Teacher spread0.311 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations30
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Lancet Infectious DiseasesSame topicTuberculosis Research and EpidemiologyFrench-language works237,207