ArticleBMJ global health2024
Towards comprehensive clinical trials for new tuberculosis drug regimens: policy recommendations from a stakeholder analysis.
Article in BMJ global health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- A systematic review of the determinants of vaccine hesitancy in the UK: Implications for future TB vaccine adoption.BMC public health · 2026Pooled it
- Article
- Article
- Combating Drug-Resistant Tuberculosis: Advancements in Diagnostics and Therapeutics.Pulmonary medicine · 2026Review
- Accelerating TB regimen development: introducing FAST-TB.IJTLD open · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundResearch and development (R&D) of new drugs and regimens against tuberculosis (TB) is evolving to meet new challenges and face limited investments in the sector. To effectively improve and fill existing gaps, researchers and trialists should engage a broad spectrum of stakeholders. With this study, we aim to map the interests in TB R&D raised by the main stakeholders in the TB field.
methodsWe conducted semistructured, short interviews to gather insight and viewpoints on innovation on TB drugs and regimens R&D of policy-makers, national TB programme officers, donors, funders, non-governmental organisations and research institutions.A composite measure of the relevance of topics that emerged was computed by implementing different models considering the importance for researchers and the urgency to implement those changes during the trial, the number of citations each topic received, and the maximum value of the influence of stakeholders who had raised the topic.
results50 stakeholders, out of 56 identified, were interviewed and almost half were policy-makers and governmental institutions. Several stakeholders highlighted the importance of disseminating information about clinical trials' methodology and emerging preliminary results, followed by the need to pursue early discussion around access and pricing of safe and effective TB innovations, although different categories of stakeholders prioritised different topics. Using different methods for ranking topics, the results remained almost unchanged. Notably, post-trial operational research ranked higher in models with higher weight for the parameter considering the number of citations.
conclusionResearchers and research consortia embarking on phase 2 and 3 clinical trials should consider a broad set of elements when planning and designing trials' protocols, all aiming at lowering the price and improving access to emerging TB innovations, besides meeting regulatory criteria. This can only be achieved by consulting and engaging relevant stakeholders in the discussion.
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.