ReviewBMC health services research2020
Review of tuberculosis treatment outcome reporting system in Denmark, a retrospective study cohort study from 2009 through 2014.
Review in BMC health services research, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Effect of Cost-Exemption Policy on Treatment Interruption in Patients With Newly Diagnosed Pulmonary Tuberculosis in South Korea.International journal of health policy and management · 2024Article
- Nutritional status and treatment outcomes of tuberculosis in Mizan Tepi University Teaching Hospital, a five -year retrospective study.PloS one · 2024Article
- Predictors for Pulmonary Tuberculosis Outcome and Adverse Events in an Italian Referral Hospital: A Nine-Year Retrospective Study (2013-2021).Annals of global health · 2022Article
- Real-world association of adherence with outcomes and economic burden in patients with tuberculosis from South Korea claims data.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIn Denmark, reporting of tuberculosis (TB) treatment outcome is voluntary and data incomplete. In the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control most recent report presenting data from 2017, only 53.9% of Danish pulmonary TB cases had a reported outcome. Monitoring of TB treatment outcome is not feasible based on such limited results. In this retrospective study from 2009 to 2014, we present complete treatment outcome data and describe characteristics of cases lost to follow up.
methodsAll cases notified from 2009 through 2014 were reviewed. Hospital records were examined, and TB treatment outcome was categorized according to the World Health Organization's (WHO) definitions.
resultsA total of 2131 TB cases were included. Treatment outcome was reported to the Surveillance Unit in 1803 (84.6%) cases, of which 468 (26.0%) were reclassified. For pulmonary TB, 339 (28.9%) cases were reclassified between cured and treatment completed. Overall, the proportion of cases who achieved successful treatment outcome increased from 1488 (70.4%) to 1748 (81.8%).
conclusionA high number of cases were reclassified during the review process. Increased focus on correct treatment outcome reporting is necessary in Denmark. A more comprehensive and exhaustive categorization of TB treatment outcome could be beneficial, especially for cases where collection of sputum or tissue towards the end of treatment is challenging.
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.