ArticleRevista panamericana de salud publica = Pan American journal of public health2021
Evaluation of the first level of care for tuberculosis control in Buenos Aires, Argentina.
Article in Revista panamericana de salud publica = Pan American journal of public health, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- The value and impact of embedded implementation research: insights from Latin America and the Caribbean.Revista panamericana de salud publica = Pan American journal of public health · 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveEvaluate primary health care functions from the perspective of patients with tuberculosis from slums in the city of Buenos Aires, Argentina.
methodsCross-sectional observational study with adult patients with tuberculosis (TB) and without TB (NoTB), living in slums (S) and outside them (NoS). Participants' perceptions were evaluated using the Primary Care Assessment Tool for users (abbreviated version), which measures four main domains (first contact, ongoing care, coordination with specialists, and comprehensiveness) and selected secondary domains. A Likert scale was used, ranging from "No, not at all" (1 point) to "Yes, definitely" (4 points). Scores ≥ 3 were considered to indicate adequate performance of functions. Averages were calculated for each domain, as well as two overall scores: with and without secondary domains.
results83 participants were included (20 TB-S, 21 TB-NoS, 19 NoTB-S, and 23 NoTB-NoS). The evaluated functions were perceived as inadequate. The TB-S group gave the lowest overall scores, not reaching 3 points in any domain. There were no significant differences in domains or overall scores between groups. Participants with TB gave lower scores in all domains, except in family-centered care, where they gave a significantly higher score than NoTB participants. The overall score without secondary domains was lower for TB participants than for the NoTB groups.
conclusionsAccording to the perception of participants with TB and without TB, primary health care functions are not satisfactory, either in slums or outside them.
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.