MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4406389398 · doi:10.1016/j.ijregi.2024.100564

Tuberculosis outcomes among international migrants living in Europe compared with the nonmigrant population: A systematic review and meta-analysis

2025· review· en· W4406389398 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Luisa Frallonardo, Roberta Papagni, Vincenzo Giliberti, Polizzotto Carla, Fabrizio Palmieri, Barbagallo Mario, Nicola Veronese, Annalisa Saracino, Francesco Di Gennaro

Bibliographic record

VenueIJID Regions · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTuberculosis Research and Epidemiology
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMeta-analysisTuberculosisPopulationSystematic reviewGeographyDemographyEnvironmental healthMedicineMEDLINEPolitical scienceSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

• Being migrant predisposes to different tuberculosis (TB) outcomes compared with nonmigrants in Europe. • Lower TB mortality risk and higher TB mortality risk characterize migrants in Europe. • Migrants in Europe showed a higher risk of loss to follow-up during TB treatment. • No differences were found in treatment success rates between migrants and nonmigrants. Migration status refers to socioeconomic factors that challenge access to the health care system and increase the risk of developing tuberculosis (TB) with worse outcomes. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to investigate the outcomes of TB among international migrants arriving in Europe compared with the nonmigrant population. A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted to identify studies investigating TB-related outcomes among migrants and nonmigrants in Europe. Six investigators searched PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science from inception to March 2024 and screened the abstracts of potentially eligible articles. Studies reporting TB-related outcomes in both migrants and nonmigrants were also included. Studies with migrant definitions other than the one from the inclusion criteria, with no control group, and with no discernible data, including nonhuman samples or written in a non-English language, were excluded. Data were reported as relative risks (RRs) or odds ratios with their 95% confidence intervals (CIs). The risk of bias was assessed using the Newcastle–Ottawa Scale (PROSPERO Registration number: CRD42024529629). Of the 1,109 papers screened, 34 were included, consisting of 601,293 participants (459,670 nonmigrants and 141,623 migrants). The meta-analysis, adjusted for potential confounders, showed that migrants presented a lower mortality risk (RR = 0.391, 95% CI: 0.276-0.554; P <0.0001; I 2 = 71.6%), a lower rate of treatment completion (RR = 0.313; 95% CI: 0.163-0.600; P <0.0001), and a higher rate of loss to follow-up (RR = 4.331, 95% CI: 1.542-12.163, P = 0.005; I 2 = 55.8%). Treatment success, cure, not evaluated, and sustained treatment success showed no significant differences between migrants and nonmigrants. No adjusted analyses could be performed for cure, not evaluated, and sustained treatment success. Only three studies had a high risk of bias. Migrants living in Europe have lower mortality rates; however, TB management is affected by a higher risk of loss to follow-up and discontinuation. Therefore, migrant-targeted TB care is necessary to improve the fight against TB in Europe.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.589
Threshold uncertainty score0.929

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0090.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
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 head0.095
GPT teacher head0.395
Teacher spread0.299 · 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 designMeta-analysis
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

Citations12
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIJID RegionsSame topicTuberculosis Research and EpidemiologyFrench-language works237,207