Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26849656›Full record

SynthesisPloS one2016

Impact of Community-Based DOT on Tuberculosis Treatment Outcomes: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

HaiYang Zhang, John Ehiri, Huan Yang, Shenglan Tang, Ying Li

Open access · goldAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in PloS one, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 53 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
53citing papers in PubMed
4.2field-weighted citation impact, top 6% of its field
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

53 citing papers in PubMed, 102 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. The impact of the stratification by degree of clinical severity and abandonment risk of tuberculosis treatment.Jornal brasileiro de pneumologia : publicacao oficial da Sociedade Brasileira de Pneumologia e Tisilogia · 2021
    Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Patient Determinants and Effects on Adherence of Adverse Drug Reactions to Tuberculosis Treatment: A Prospective Cohort Analysis.Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America · 2025
    Article
  9. Observational
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Observational
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

HaiYang ZhangCollege of Preventive Medicine, Third Military Medical University, Chongqing, China.
John EhiriDepartment of Health Promotion Sciences, Mel & Enid Zuckerman College of Public Health, University of Arizona, Tucson, Arizona, United States of America.
Huan YangDepartment of Hygienic Toxicology, Key Lab of Medical Protection for Electromagnetic Radiation, Ministry of Education of China, Third Military Medical University, China.
Shenglan TangDuke Global Health Institute, Duke University, Durham, North Carolina, United States of America.
Ying LiDepartment of Social Medicine and Health Service Management, College of Preventive Medicine, Third Military Medical University, Chongqing, China.
Army Medical University · CNDuke Institute for Health Innovation · USUniversity of Arizona · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPoor adherence to tuberculosis (TB) treatment can lead to prolonged infectivity and poor treatment outcomes. Directly observed treatment (DOT) seeks to improve adherence to TB treatment by observing patients while they take their anti-TB medication. Although community-based DOT (CB-DOT) programs have been widely studied and promoted, their effectiveness has been inconsistent. The aim of this study was to critical appraise and summarize evidence of the effects of CB-DOT on TB treatment outcomes.

methodsStudies published up to the end of February 2015 were identified from three major international literature databases: Medline/PubMed, EBSCO, and EMBASE. Unpublished data from the grey literature were identified through Google and Google Scholar searches.

resultsSeventeen studies involving 12,839 pulmonary TB patients (PTB) in eight randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and nine cohort studies from 12 countries met the criteria for inclusion in this review and 14 studies were included in meta-analysis. Compared with clinic-based DOT, pooled results of RCTs for all PTB cases (including smear-negative or -positive, new or retreated TB cases) and smear-positive PTB cases indicated that CB-DOT promoted successful treatment [pooled RRs (95%CIs): 1.11 (1.02-1.19) for all PTB cases and 1.11 (1.02-1.19) for smear-positive PTB cases], and completed treatment [pooled RRs (95%CIs): 1.74(1.05, 2.90) for all PTB cases and 2.22(1.16, 4.23) for smear-positive PTB cases], reduced death [pooled RRs (95%CIs): 0.44 (0.26-0.72) for all PTB cases and 0.39 (0.23-0.66) for smear-positive PTB cases], and transfer out [pooled RRs (95%CIs): 0.37 (0.23-0.61) for all PTB cases and 0.42 (0.25-0.70) for smear-positive PTB cases]. Pooled results of all studies (RCTs and cohort studies) with all PTB cases demonstrated that CB-DOT promoted successful treatment [pooled RR (95%CI): 1.13 (1.03-1.24)] and curative treatment [pooled RR (95%CI): 1.24 (1.04-1.48)] compared with self-administered treatment.

conclusionsCB-DOT did improved TB treatment outcomes according to the pooled results of included studies in this review. Studies on strategies for implementation of patient-centered and community-centered CB-DOT deserve further attention.

Indexed as

Directly Observed TherapyAntitubercular AgentsHumansTreatment OutcomeTuberculosisTuberculosis, PulmonaryAntitubercular Agents

Identifiers

PMID26849656
PMCPMC4744041
OpenAlexW2268311086

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC0
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.