WHO target product profile for TB detection at peripheral settings: 2024 update
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In 2014, the World Health Organization (WHO) published target product profiles (TPPs) which detailed minimal and optimal criteria to address high-priority TB diagnostic needs. Since then, the TB community's needs have evolved; there has been a surge in new and innovative platforms suggesting use of alternative non-invasive specimens for TB diagnosis. This updated TPP used evidence-based modelling to guide the decision-making process for specific characteristics which was a novel approach to this process. This document focusses on point of care, near point of care and low complexity assays using sputum and non-sputum-based specimens. The standard WHO protocol was followed for this TPP document including Delphi process, public comments and TPP development group consultations. Our modelling work suggests that lower accuracy estimates for point of care, easily accessible tests are acceptable to achieve comparable or better case detection than the current standard of care. In this document, we describe the process of updating the TPP for TB diagnostic tests at peripheral settings, highlight key updates, use of modelling to inform this update, and discuss guidance regarding technical and operational specifications.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".