Evidence map›Paper›PMID 12535470›Full record

SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2003

Directly observed therapy for treating tuberculosis.

J Volmink, P Garner

Abstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2003. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Directly observed therapy for treating tuberculosis.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2015
    Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Spinal Tuberculosis: Current Concepts.Global spine journal · 2018
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Tuberculosis and social exclusion.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2006
    Article
  11. Pulmonary tuberculosis: diagnosis and treatment.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2006
    Review
  12. Directly observed treatment for tuberculosis.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2003
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

J VolminkResearch and Analysis, Global Health Council, 1701 K Street, NW - Suite 600, Washington DC 20006-1503, USA. jvolmink@globalhealth.org
P Garner

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundUp to half the people with tuberculosis do not complete their treatment. Thus strategies that improve adherence to treatment regimens are important.

objectivesTo compare policies of directly observed therapy with self treatment at home in people requiring treatment for clinically active tuberculosis, or requiring medication for prevention of active disease, on cure and/or treatment completion. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched The Cochrane Controlled Trials Register (Issue 3, 2002), the Cochrane Infectious Diseases Group trials register (August 2002), MEDLINE (1966 to August 2002), EMBASE (1980 to August 2002), LILACS (accessed August 2002), and reference lists of articles. We also contacted experts in the field. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomized and quasi-randomized trials of appointed agents (health worker, community volunteer, or family member) directly observing people swallowing their antituberculous drugs compared with self treatment for tuberculosis. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two reviewers independently assessed the methodological quality of the trials and extracted data. MAIN

resultsSix studies included (n=1910). Patients allocated to directly observed therapy (DOT) compared had similar outcomes in relation to cure (Relative Risk (RR) 1.06; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.98 to 1.14); and cure plus treatment completion (RR 1.06; 95% CI 1.00 to 1.13). A stratified analysis by the appointed agent (health professional, lay health worker, or family/community member) did not detect any important differences. One study conducted in an optimal setting in which participants were given a choice of supervisor did show modest benefit (cure RR 1.13; 95% CI 1.04 to 1.24; cure plus treatment completion RR 1.11; 95% CI 1.03 to 1.18). Two trials assessed the effects of direct observation on completion of antituberculous preventive therapy in intravenous drug users in the USA. One study found no difference between DOT by an outreach nurse and routine self treatment (RR 1.02; 95% CI 0.89 to 1.18). The other study compared completion rates between participants who chose their DOT location and those receiving DOT at a community clinic and failed to demonstrate a significant difference (RR 0.88; 95% CI 0.63 to 1.23). REVIEWER'S

conclusionsWell conducted trials comparing a policy of directly observed therapy with self treatment at home have been carried out in low, middle, and high income countries. Studies include people on treatment or people at high risk of developing tuberculosis. The effects of direct observation on cure or treatment completion were similar to those of self-administered treatment.

Indexed as

Directly Observed TherapyAntitubercular AgentsHumansRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicTuberculosis, PulmonaryAntitubercular Agents

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.