Sustainability and impact of an intervention to improve initiation of tuberculosis preventive treatment: results from a follow-up study of the ACT4 randomized trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
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 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 | 0.056 | 0.094 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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.
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".