Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28157466›Full record

ArticleThe international journal of tuberculosis and lung disease : the official journal of the International Union against Tuberculosis and Lung Disease2017

Is IPT more effective in high-burden settings? Modelling the effect of tuberculosis incidence on IPT impact.

R Ragonnet, J M Trauer, E S McBryde, R M G J Houben, J T Denholm, A Handel, T Sumner

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The international journal of tuberculosis and lung disease : the official journal of the International Union against Tuberculosis and Lung Disease, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed, 2 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

20 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Timing ofThorax · 2021
    Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Current update on malaria in pregnancy: a systematic review.Tropical diseases, travel medicine and vaccines · 2025
    Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  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

7 authors.

R RagonnetDepartment of Medicine, Royal Melbourne Hospital/Western Hospital, University of Melbourne, Parkville, Centre for Population Health, Burnet Institute, Melbourne, Australia.
J M TrauerDepartment of Medicine, Royal Melbourne Hospital/Western Hospital, University of Melbourne, Parkville, Australia; Centre for Population Health, Burnet Institute, Melbourne, Victorian Tuberculosis Program, Melbourne Health, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
E S McBrydeDepartment of Medicine, Royal Melbourne Hospital/Western Hospital, University of Melbourne, Parkville, Centre for Population Health, Burnet Institute, Melbourne, Australia; Australian Institute of Tropical Health and Medicine, James Cook University, Townsville, Queensland, Australia.
R M G J HoubenDepartment of Infectious Disease Epidemiology, TB Modelling Group, TB Centre, and Centre for the Mathematical Modelling of Infectious Diseases, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, UK.
J T DenholmVictorian Tuberculosis Program, Melbourne Health, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia; Department of Microbiology and Immunology, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia; Victorian Infectious Diseases Service, Royal Melbourne Hospital, Parkville, Victoria, Australia.
A HandelDepartment of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, College of Public Health, University of Georgia, Athens, Georgia, USA.
T SumnerDepartment of Infectious Disease Epidemiology, TB Modelling Group, TB Centre, and Centre for the Mathematical Modelling of Infectious Diseases, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

settingIsoniazid preventive therapy (IPT) is effective for preventing active tuberculosis (TB), although its mechanism of action is poorly understood and the optimal disease burden for IPT use has not been defined.

objectiveTo describe the relationship between TB incidence and IPT effectiveness.

methodsWe constructed a model of TB transmission dynamics to investigate IPT effectiveness under various epidemiological settings. The model structure was intended to be highly adaptable to uncertainty in both input parameters and the mechanism of action of IPT. To determine the optimal setting for IPT use, we identified the lowest number needed to treat (NNT) with IPT to prevent one case of active TB.

resultsWe found that the NNT as a function of TB incidence shows a 'U-shape', whereby IPT impact is greatest at an intermediate incidence and attenuated at both lower and higher incidence levels. This U-shape was observed over a broad range of parameter values; the optimal TB incidence was between 500 and 900 cases per 100 000 per year.

conclusionsTB burden is a critical factor to consider when making decisions about communitywide implementation of IPT. We believe that the total disease burden should not preclude programmatic application of IPT.

Indexed as

Antitubercular AgentsHumansIncidenceIsoniazidSensitivity and SpecificityTuberculosisWorld Health OrganizationAntitubercular AgentsIsoniazid

Identifiers

PMID28157466
PMCPMC5166561

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.