ArticleThe Journal of pediatrics2015
Missed opportunities for tuberculosis screening in primary care.
Article in The Journal of pediatrics, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Multicenter Analysis of Attrition from the Pediatric Tuberculosis Infection Care Cascade in Boston.The Journal of pediatrics · 2023Article
- Testing and Scaling Interventions to Improve the Tuberculosis Infection Care Cascade.Journal of the Pediatric Infectious Diseases Society · 2022Review
- A scoping review of paediatric latent tuberculosis infection care cascades: initial steps are lacking.BMJ global health · 2021Article
- Tuberculosis in Children.Pediatric clinics of North America · 2017Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo assess how frequently pediatric practitioners perform latent tuberculosis infection (LTBI) screening according to guidelines. We hypothesized that screening occurs less frequently among children whose parents do not speak English as the primary language. STUDY
designWe conducted a retrospective cohort study of patients attending well-child visits in an urban academic pediatric primary care clinic between April 1, 2012, and March 31, 2013. We assessed documentation of 3 LTBI screening components and tested the association between parent primary language and tuberculin skin test (TST) placement and documentation of results.
resultsDuring the study period, 387 of 9143 children (4%) had no documentation of screening question responses. Among the other 8756 children, 831 (10%) were identified as at high risk for LTBI. Of these, 514 (62%) did not have documented TST placement in the appropriate time frame. Thirty-nine of 213 children (18%) who had a TST placed did not have documented results. Multivariable regression showed that parent language was not associated with TST placement or documentation of results, but non-Hispanic Black children were more likely to not have a documented test result (aOR, 2.12; 95% CI, 1.07-4.19; P=.03) when adjusting for age, sex, parent primary language, insurance status, day of the week, and study year of TST placement.
conclusionParent primary language was not associated with LTBI testing. However, we found substantial gaps in TST placement and documentation of TST results among high-risk children, the latter of which was associated with race/ethnicity. Targeted quality improvement efforts should focus on developing processes to ensure complete screening in high-risk children.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.