ArticleERJ open research2022
Latent tuberculosis screening and treatment in HIV: highly acceptable in a prospective cohort study.
Article in ERJ open research, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Latent Tuberculosis: Challenges in Diagnosis and Treatment, Perspectives, and the Crucial Role of Biomarkers.Current microbiology · 2023Review
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 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: People living with HIV (PLWH) are at increased risk of re-activation of latent tuberculosis infection (LTBI). Although UK and international guidelines identify this group as a priority for LTBI screening and treatment, data on attitudes of PLWH to this policy recommendation are lacking. Methods: A five-point, Likert-style questionnaire was administered to PLWH to assess views and intentions towards accepting LTBI screening and treatment. Subsequent interferon-γ release assay (IGRA) testing was offered, and chemoprophylaxis if required. Influencing demographic and psychological associations with planned, and actual, testing and treatment uptake were assessed using multivariable logistic regression. Results: 444 out of 716 (62%) patients responded. 417 out of 437 (95.4%) expressed intention to accept LTBI testing. The only significant association was the perceived importance of testing to the individual (adjusted odds ratio (aOR) 8.98, 95% CI 2.55-31.67). 390 out of 393 (99.2%) accepted appropriate IGRA screening; 41 out of 390 (10.5%) were positive. 397 out of 431 (92.1%) expressed intention to accept chemoprophylaxis, associated with perceived importance of treatment (aOR 3.52, 95% CI 1.46-8.51), a desire to have treatment for LTBI (aOR 1.77, 95% CI 0.99-3.15) and confidence in taking treatment (aOR 3.77, 95% CI 1.84-7.72). Of those offered chemoprophylaxis, 36 out of 37 (97.3%) accepted and 34 out of 36 (94.4%) completed treatment. There were no correlates with actual screening acceptance. Conclusions: LTBI is common amongst PLWH, highlighting the importance of robust screening and treatment programmes. This study shows that screening and treatment for LTBI is highly acceptable to PLWH and provides strong, objective evidence for policy-makers developing guidelines in this cohort.
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.