ArticlePloS one2022
Development and validation of a prediction algorithm to identify birth in countries with high tuberculosis incidence in two large California health systems.
Article in PloS one, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Efficacy of a Brief Educational Video for Patients Prescribed Latent Tuberculosis Treatment: A Randomized Trial in the United States.Open forum infectious diseases · 2026Article
- Disparities in testing for latent tuberculosis infection in a large US integrated healthcare system.Public health · 2026Article
- Identifying Gaps in Tuberculosis Preventive Care for Non-U.S.-born Persons at Community Health Clinics in the United States.Open forum infectious diseases · 2025Article
- Development and validation of prediction algorithm to identify tuberculosis in two large California health systems.Nature communications · 2025Article
- Risk of Incident Tuberculosis Disease in a Large Integrated Health Care System in California, 2004-2022.Open forum infectious diseases · 2025Article
- Latent Tuberculosis Infection Testing Practices in a Large US Integrated Healthcare System.Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America · 2024Article
- Prior Screening for Latent Tuberculosis Among Patients Diagnosed With Tuberculosis Disease: Missed Opportunities?Open forum infectious diseases · 2023Article
- Area-Based Sociodemographic Factors Associated with Latent Tuberculosis Infection in a Low-Prevalence Setting.The American journal of tropical medicine and hygiene · 2023Article
- Latent Tuberculosis Infection Treatment Practices in Two Large Integrated Health Systems in California, 2009-2018.Open forum infectious 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
12 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveThough targeted testing for latent tuberculosis infection ("LTBI") for persons born in countries with high tuberculosis incidence ("HTBIC") is recommended in health care settings, this information is not routinely recorded in the electronic health record ("EHR"). We develop and validate a prediction model for birth in a HTBIC using EHR data. MATERIALS AND
methodsIn a cohort of patients within Kaiser Permanente Southern California ("KPSC") and Kaiser Permanent Northern California ("KPNC") between January 1, 2008 and December 31, 2019, KPSC was used as the development dataset and KPNC was used for external validation using logistic regression. Model performance was evaluated using area under the receiver operator curve ("AUCROC") and area under the precision and recall curve ("AUPRC"). We explored various cut-points to improve screening for LTBI.
resultsKPSC had 73% and KPNC had 54% of patients missing country-of-birth information in the EHR, leaving 2,036,400 and 2,880,570 patients with EHR-documented country-of-birth at KPSC and KPNC, respectively. The final model had an AUCROC of 0.85 and 0.87 on internal and external validation datasets, respectively. It had an AUPRC of 0.69 and 0.64 (compared to a baseline HTBIC-birth prevalence of 0.24 at KPSC and 0.19 at KPNC) on internal and external validation datasets, respectively. The cut-points explored resulted in a number needed to screen from 7.1-8.5 persons/positive LTBI diagnosis, compared to 4.2 and 16.8 persons/positive LTBI diagnosis from EHR-documented birth in a HTBIC and current screening criteria, respectively. DISCUSSION: Using logistic regression with EHR data, we developed a simple yet useful model to predict birth in a HTBIC which decreased the number needed to screen compared to current LTBI screening criteria.
conclusionOur model improves the ability to screen for LTBI in health care settings based on birth in a HTBIC.
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.