ArticleIJID regions2022
Diagnostic accuracy of paper-based reporting of tuberculosis treatment outcomes in rural eastern Uganda.
Article in IJID regions, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- The burden of tuberculosis and drug resistance in 22 Sub-Saharan African countries, 1990-2021: a GBD 2021 analysis and progress towards WHO 2035 targets with projections to 2050.Frontiers in microbiology · 2025Article
- Effect of missed clinic visits on treatment outcomes among people with tuberculosis: a quasi-experimental study utilizing instrumental variable analysis.IJID regions · 2024Article
- Treatment success and mortality among people with multi-drug resistant and rifampicin resistant-tuberculosis on bedaquiline-based regimen at three referral hospitals in Uganda: A retrospective analysis.Journal of clinical tuberculosis and other mycobacterial diseases · 2024Article
- A comparative analysis of two national tuberculosis reporting systems and their impact on tuberculosis case notification in Uganda.African health sciences · 2023Article
- Low treatment success rate among previously treated persons with drug-susceptible pulmonary tuberculosis in Kampala, Uganda.Journal of clinical tuberculosis and other mycobacterial diseases · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Inaccurate reporting of tuberculosis (TB) data to the district and national TB control programmes undermines effective TB control, yet this remains understudied. This study assessed the accuracy of the paper-based approach compared with the World Health Organization (WHO) standard TB treatment outcome as the gold standard for the determination of TB treatment outcome. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV) of the paper-based approach, as well as the percentage agreement between the paper-based approach and the WHO standard TB treatment outcome, are reported. Data from 987 participants were used. Ninety-three participants were misclassified as cured and 195 were misclassified as not cured by the paper-based approach, giving 62.7% sensitivity, 80.0% specificity, 77.9% PPV, 65.5% NPV and percentage agreement of 70.8%. Treatment failure had 64.7% sensitivity, 99.9% specificity, 52.4% PPV, 99.4% NPV, and percentage agreement of 98.4%. Treatment success had 98.8% sensitivity, 96.8% specificity, 99.2% PPV and 94.8% NPV. The paper-based approach was found to report treatment success accurately, but did not report cure and treatment failure accurately. Interventions are thus required to improve the accuracy of the paper-based approach.
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.