ArticlePloS one2020
A tuberculin skin test survey among healthcare workers in two public tertiary care hospitals in Bangladesh.
Article in PloS one, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Prevalence and exposure variables of latent infection by mycobacterium tuberculosis in healthcare workers.Revista brasileira de enfermagem · 2025Review
- Review
- Article
- Article
- Examining pulmonary TB patient management and healthcare workers exposures in two public tertiary care hospitals, Bangladesh.PLOS global public health · 2022Article
- Monocyte-related gene biomarkers for latent and active tuberculosis.Bioengineered · 2021Article
- Implementation status of national tuberculosis infection control guidelines in Bangladeshi hospitals.PloS one · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
In Bangladesh, there is currently no data on the burden of latent TB infection (LTBI) amongst hospital healthcare workers (HCWs). This study aimed to determine the prevalence of LTBI and compare the prevalence among HCWs in two public tertiary care hospitals. Between September 2018 and August 2019, we conducted a cross-sectional study in two public tertiary care general hospitals. Using a survey and tuberculin skin test (TST), we assessed risk factors for LTBI, adjusting for known and plausible confounders. In addition, a facility assessment was undertaken to understand the implementation of relevant IPC measures. The prevalence of LTBI among HCWs was 42%. HCWs spent a median of 6 hours (SD = 1.76, IQR 2.00) per day and attended an average of 1.87 pulmonary TB patients per week. HCWs did not receive any TB IPC training, the wards lacked a symptom checklist to screen patients for TB, and no masks were available for coughing patients. Seventy-seven percent reportedly did not use any facial protection (masks or respirators) while caring for patients. In the multivariable model adjusting for hospital level clustering effect, TST positivity was significantly higher among HCWs aged 35-45 years (aOR1.36, 95% CI: 1.06-1.73) and with >3 years of service (aOR 1.67, 95% CI: 1.62-1.72). HCWs working in the medicine ward had 3.65 (95% CI: 2.20-6.05) times, and HCWs in the gynecology and obstetrics ward had 2.46 (95% CI: 1.42-4.27) times higher odds of TST positivity compared to HCWs working in administrative areas. This study identified high prevalence of LTBI among HCWs. This may be due to the level of exposure to pulmonary TB patients, and/or limited use of personal protective equipment along with poor implementation of TB IPC in the hospitals. Considering the high prevalence of LTBI, we recommend the national TB program consider providing preventative therapy to the HCWs as the high-risk group, and implement TB IPC in the hospitals.
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.