ArticlePloS one2023
Spatially-targeted tuberculosis screening has limited impact beyond household contact tracing in Lima, Peru: A model-based analysis.
Article in PloS one, 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, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Adaptive bandit algorithms increase efficiency of mobile tuberculosis screening programs.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Integrating genomic and spatial analyses to describe tuberculosis transmission: a scoping review.The Lancet. Microbe · 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
10 authors at 5 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
Abstract
Mathematical models have suggested that spatially-targeted screening interventions for tuberculosis may efficiently accelerate disease control, but empirical data supporting these findings are limited. Previous models demonstrating substantial impacts of these interventions have typically simulated large-scale screening efforts and have not attempted to capture the spatial distribution of tuberculosis in households and communities at a high resolution. Here, we calibrate an individual-based model to the locations of case notifications in one district of Lima, Peru. We estimate the incremental efficiency and impact of a spatially-targeted interventions used in combination with household contact tracing (HHCT). Our analysis reveals that HHCT is relatively efficient with a median of 40 (Interquartile Range: 31.7 to 49.9) household contacts required to be screened to detect a single case of active tuberculosis. However, HHCT has limited population impact, producing a median incidence reduction of only 3.7% (Interquartile Range: 5.8% to 1.9%) over 5 years. In comparison, spatially targeted screening (which we modeled as active case finding within high tuberculosis prevalence areas 100 m2 grid cell) is far less efficient, requiring evaluation of ≈12 times the number of individuals as HHCT to find a single individual with active tuberculosis. Furthermore, the addition of the spatially targeted screening effort produced only modest additional reductions in tuberculosis incidence over the 5 year period (≈1.3%) in tuberculosis incidence. In summary, we found that HHCT is an efficient approach for tuberculosis case finding, but has limited population impact. Other screening approaches which target areas of high tuberculosis prevalence are less efficient, and may have limited impact unless very large numbers of individuals can be screened.
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.