ArticleJournal of public health research2023
A mixed methods evaluation of a differentiated care model piloted for TB care in south India.
Article in Journal of public health research, 2023. 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.
- Patient perspectives on tailored tuberculosis services: Lessons from India's National Tuberculosis Elimination Programme.Journal of public health research · 2026Article
- "Differentiated care is not a matter of feasibility but a necessity"- service providers' perception on initiating a comprehensive tuberculosis care package (CCp-K) to reduce deaths in Kerala, India.BMC health services research · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: India's National TB Elimination Program emphasizes patient-centered care to improve TB treatment outcomes. We describe the lessons learned from the implementation of a differentiated care model for TB care among individuals diagnosed with active TB. Design and methods: Used mixed methods to pilot the Differentiated Care Model. Community health workers (CHWs) conducted a risk and needs assessment among individuals who were recently began TB treatment. Individuals identified with specific factors that are associated with poor treatment adherence were provided education, counseling, and linked to treatment and support services. Examined changes in TB treatment outcomes between the two cohorts of individuals on TB treatment before and after the intervention. We used qualitative research methods to explore the experiences of patients, family members, and front-line TB workers with the implementation of the DCM pilot. Results: The CHWs were adept at the identification of individuals with risks to non-adherence. However, only a few provided differentiated care, as envisioned. There was no significant change in the TB treatment outcomes between the two cohorts of patients examined. CHWs' ability to provide differentiated care on a scale was limited by the short duration of implementation, their inadequate skills to manage co-morbidities, and the suboptimal support at the field level. Conclusions: It is feasible for a cadre of well-trained front-line workers, mentored and supported by counselors and doctors, to provide differentiated care to those at risk for unfavorable TB treatment outcomes. However, differentiated care must be implemented on a scale for a duration that allows a change from the conventional practice of front-line workers, in order to influence the outcomes of population-level TB treatment.
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.