MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4393252519 · doi:10.1016/j.eclinm.2024.102546

Sustainability and impact of an intervention to improve initiation of tuberculosis preventive treatment: results from a follow-up study of the ACT4 randomized trial

2024· article· en· W4393252519 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Dick Menzies, Joseph Obeng, Panji Fortuna Hadisoemarto, Rovina Ruslami, Mênonli Adjobimey, Dina Fisher, Leila Barss, Nancy Bedingfield, Richard Long, Catherine Paulsen, James C. Johnston, Kamila Romanowski, Victoria Cook, Greg J. Fox, Thu Anh Nguyen, Chantal Valiquette, Olivia Oxlade, Federica Fregonese, Andrea Benedetti

Bibliographic record

VenueEClinicalMedicine · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTuberculosis Research and Epidemiology
Canadian institutionsBC Centre for Disease ControlUniversity of AlbertaUniversity of CalgaryUniversity of British ColumbiaMcGill University
FundersNational Health and Medical Research CouncilMedical Research CouncilCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsMedicineRandomized controlled trialIntervention (counseling)Clinical trialTuberculosisCluster (spacecraft)SurgeryInternal medicineNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: In a cluster randomized trial (clinicaltrials.gov: NCT02810678) a flexible but comprehensive health system intervention significantly increased the number of household contacts (HHC) identified and started on tuberculosis preventive treatment (TPT). A follow-up study was conducted one year later to test the hypotheses that these effects were sustained, and were reproducible with a simplified intervention. Methods: We conducted a follow-up study from May 1, 2018 until April 30, 2019, as part of a multinational cluster randomized trial. Eight sites in 4 countries that had received the intervention in the original trial received no further intervention; eight other sites in the same countries that had not received the intervention (control sites in the original trial) now received a simplified version of the intervention. This consisted of repeated local evaluation of the Cascade of care for TB infection, and stakeholder decision making. The number of HHC identified and starting TPT were repeatedly measured at all 16 sites and expressed as rates per 100 newly diagnosed index TB patients. The sustained effect of the original intervention was estimated by comparing these rates after the intervention in the original trial with the last 6 months of the follow-up study. The reproducibility was estimated by comparing the pre-post intervention changes in rates at sites receiving the original intervention with the pre-post changes in rates at sites receiving the later, simplified intervention. Findings: With regard to the sustained impact of the original intervention, compared to the original post-intervention period, the number of HHC identified and treated per 100 newly diagnosed TB patients was 10 more (95% confidence interval: 84 fewer to 105 more), and 1 fewer (95% CI: 22 fewer to 20 more) respectively up to 14 months after the end of the original intervention. With regard to the reproducibility of the simplified intervention, at sites that had initially served as control sites, the number of HHC identified and treated per 100 TB patients increased by 33 (95% CI: -32, 97), and 16 (-69, 100) from 3 months before, to up to 6 months after receiving a streamlined intervention, although differences were larger, and significant if the post-intervention results were compared to all pre-intervention periods. Interpretation: Up to one year after it ended, a health system intervention resulted in sustained increases in the number of HHC identified and starting TPT. A simplified version of the intervention was associated with non-significant increases in the identification and treatment of HHC. Inferences are limited by potential bias due to other temporal effects, and the small number of study sites. Funding: Funded by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (Grant number 143350).

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.035
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
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 score0.191
Threshold uncertainty score0.992

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.035
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.444
Teacher spread0.402 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEClinicalMedicineSame topicTuberculosis Research and EpidemiologyFrench-language works237,207