ArticlePloS one2017
Stakeholder perspectives for optimization of tuberculosis contact investigation in a high-burden setting.
Article in PloS one, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Community views on active case finding for tuberculosis in low- and middle-income countries: a qualitative evidence synthesis.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2024Pooled it
- Facilitators and barriers to tuberculosis active case findings in low- and middle-income countries: a systematic review of qualitative research.BMC infectious diseases · 2023Pooled it
- Health worker perspectives on barriers and facilitators of tuberculosis investigation coverage among index case contacts in rural Southwestern Uganda: a qualitative study.BMC infectious diseases · 2024Article
- Parallels and Mutual Lessons in Tuberculosis and COVID-19 Transmission, Prevention, and Control.Emerging infectious diseases · 2021Review
- Implementation of a volunteer contact tracing program for COVID-19 in the United States: A qualitative focus group study.PloS one · 2021Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
introductionOptimal tuberculosis contact investigation impacts TB prevention, timely case finding and linkage to care, however data on routine implementation in high burden contexts is limited. MATERIALS AND
methodsIn a multi-method qualitative study based on individual interviews with TB patients, facility observations and focus group discussions with health workers (HWs) in 13 public health facilities, and key informant interviews with governmental and non-governmental experts, we describe TB contact investigation in the context of an urban setting in Kenya and identify opportunities for optimization.
resultsInvitation of TB patients to bring close contacts by HWs was key for all patient decisions that led to contact screening in addition to patients' understanding of TB transmission and desire to avoid contacts suffering from TB. Sub-optimal HW enquiry of TB patients and contacts presenting at the facility were missed opportunities which stemmed from lack of standardized operational procedures, documentation tools and HW training. Stakeholders proposed provision of fast tracked and holistic health packages for contacts seeking TB screening, and sustainable government led funding for the requisite infrastructure and workforce.
conclusionTB contact invitation by HWs leading to contact screening occurs in this context. Stakeholder perspectives inform the design of an operational framework for optimized delivery.
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.