Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28264655›Full record

Trial reportBMC infectious diseases2017

Screening in Maternity to Ascertain Tuberculosis Status (SMATS) study.

Edward Broughton, Samson Haumba, Marianne Calnan, Sandile Ginindsa, Rosanna Jeffries, Gugu Maphalala, Sikhathele Mazibuko, Munamato Mirara, Surbhi Modi, Pasipamire Munyaradzi and 2 more

Abstract readClinical Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in BMC infectious diseases, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Detecting tuberculosis in pregnant and postpartum women in Eswatini.African journal of laboratory medicine · 2020
    Article
  5. Review
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

12 authors.

Edward BroughtonDirector of Research and Evaluation, University Research Co., LLC (URC), Bethesda, USA. ebroughton@urc-chs.com.
Samson HaumbaChief of Party, URC Swaziland, Mbabane, Swaziland.
Marianne CalnanURC Swaziland, Mbabane, Swaziland.
Sandile GinindsaURC Swaziland, Mbabane, Swaziland.
Rosanna JeffriesClinton Health Access Initiative, Dodoma, Tanzania.
Gugu MaphalalaSwaziland Health Laboratory Services Project, Mbabane, Swaziland.
Sikhathele MazibukoSwaziland National AIDS Program, Mbabane, Swaziland.
Munamato MiraraUSAID Swaziland, Mbabane, Swaziland.
Surbhi ModiU.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, USA.
Pasipamire MunyaradziURC Swaziland, Mbabane, Swaziland.
Peter PrekoU.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, USA.
Batsabile SimelaneURC Swaziland, Mbabane, Swaziland.

Funding

PEPFAR
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDiagnosis of tuberculosis is difficult among pregnant women because the signs and symptoms of the disease, such as fatigue, shortness of breath, sweating, cough, and mild fever are similar to some manifestations of pregnancy. It is particularly challenging among HIV-infected women as symptoms are often masked or atypical. Currently, WHO recommends a standard four-symptom screening tool for pregnant and lactating women. There is evidence from South Africa that this screening tool (which, despite complex symptomology in this population, recommends identification of patients with weight loss, fever, current cough and night sweats), may be missing true active TB cases. However there exist several laboratory and clinical procedures that have the potential to improve the sensitivity and specificity of this screening tool.

methodsThis study will evaluate the sensitivity and specificity of the current TB screening tool for pregnant and lactating women, both HIV positive and negative. We will also assess several different enhanced screening algorithm using LAM, IGRA, TST and chest radiography and clinical/laboratory procedures and tests. The study will use a cross-sectional analytical study design involving pregnant and lactating women up to six months post-delivery attending antenatal or postnatal care, respectively in one of three selected public health units in Swaziland. Participants will be consecutively enrolled and will be in one of four groups of interest: HIV infected pregnant women, non-HIV infected pregnant women, HIV infected lactating women and non-HIV infected lactating women. DISCUSSION: We expect in conducting all procedures on all participants regardless of result of the symptom screening we may experience a high refusal rate. However, this risk will be mitigated by the long data collection period of five or more months.

Indexed as

AdolescentAdultAlgorithmsClinical ProtocolsCoinfectionCross-Sectional StudiesEswatiniFemaleHIV InfectionsHumansLactationPostnatal CarePregnancyPregnancy Complications, InfectiousPrenatal CareSensitivity and SpecificityDiagnosisHIVPregnancyScreeningTestingTuberculosis

Identifiers

PMID28264655
PMCPMC5340038

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.