Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28542441›Full record

Trial reportPloS one2017

DOT or SAT for Rifampicin-resistant tuberculosis? A non-randomized comparison in a high HIV-prevalence setting.

Erika Mohr, Johnny Daniels, Busisiwe Beko, Petros Isaakidis, Vivian Cox, Sarah Jane Steele, Odelia Muller, Leigh Snyman, Virginia De Azevedo, Amir Shroufi and 2 more

Open access · goldAbstract readClinical Trial
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in PloS one, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
1.0field-weighted citation impact, top 27% 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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 14 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Patient-centred interventions for drug-resistant tuberculosis: A scoping review.South African family practice : official journal of the South African Academy of Family Practice/Primary Care · 2025
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. 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

12 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Erika MohrMédecins Sans Frontières (MSF), Khayelitsha, South Africa.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5269-6503
Johnny DanielsMédecins Sans Frontières (MSF), Khayelitsha, South Africa.
Busisiwe BekoMédecins Sans Frontières (MSF), Khayelitsha, South Africa.
Petros IsaakidisMédecins Sans Frontières (MSF), South African Medical Unit, Cape Town, South Africa.
Vivian CoxUniversity of Cape Town (UCT), Center for Infectious Disease Epidemiology and Research, School of Public Health and Family Medicine, Cape Town, South Africa.
Sarah Jane SteeleMédecins Sans Frontières (MSF), Cape Town, South Africa.
Odelia MullerMédecins Sans Frontières (MSF), Khayelitsha, South Africa.
Leigh SnymanMédecins Sans Frontières (MSF), Khayelitsha, South Africa.
Virginia De AzevedoCity of Cape Town Health Department, Cape Town, South Africa.
Amir ShroufiMédecins Sans Frontières (MSF), Cape Town, South Africa.
Laura Trivino DuranMédecins Sans Frontières (MSF), Khayelitsha, South Africa.
Jennifer HughesMédecins Sans Frontières (MSF), Khayelitsha, South Africa.
Médecins Sans Frontières · ZACity of Cape Town · ZAUniversity of Cape Town · ZA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDaily directly-observed therapy (DOT) is recommended for rifampicin-resistant tuberculosis (RR-TB) patients throughout treatment. We assessed the impact of self-administered treatment (SAT) in a South African township with high rates of RR-TB and HIV.

methodsCommunity-supported SAT for patients who completed the intensive phase was piloted in five primary care clinics in Khayelitsha. We compared final treatment outcomes among RR-TB patients initiating treatment before (standard-of-care (SOC)-cohort, January 2010-July 2013) and after the implementation of the pilot (SAT-cohort, January 2012-December 2014). All patients with outcomes before January 1, 2017 were considered in the analysis of outcomes.

resultsOne-hundred-eighteen patients in the SOC-cohort and 174 patients in the SAT-cohort had final RR-TB treatment outcomes; 70% and 73% were HIV-co-infected, respectively. The proportion of patients with a final outcome of loss to follow-up (LTFU) did not differ whether treated in the SOC (25/118, 21.2%) or SAT-cohort (31/174, 17.8%) (P = 0.47). There were no significant differences in the time to 24-month LTFU among HIV-infected and uninfected patients (HR 0.90, 95% CI: 0.51-1.6, P = 0.71), or among patients enrolled in the SOC-cohort versus the SAT-cohort (HR 0.83, 95% CI: 0.49-1.4, P = 0.50) who received at least 6-months of RR-TB treatment.

conclusionThe introduction of SAT during the continuation phase of RR-TB treatment does not adversely affect final RR-TB treatment outcomes in a high TB and HIV-burden setting. This differentiated, patient-centred model of care could be considered in RR-TB programmes to decrease the burden of DOT on patients and health facilities.

Indexed as

AdultAnti-Retroviral AgentsAntitubercular AgentsDirectly Observed TherapyDrug ResistanceFemaleHIV InfectionsHumansMalePrevalenceRifampinTreatment OutcomeTuberculosisAnti-Retroviral AgentsAntitubercular AgentsRifampin

Identifiers

PMID28542441
PMCPMC5436852
OpenAlexW2614936789

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.