ArticlePLOS global public health2024
Higher loss of livelihood and impoverishment in households affected by tuberculosis compared to non-tuberculosis affected households in Zimbabwe: A cross-sectional study.
Article in PLOS global public health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Article
Corrections and comments
- Update of
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Tuberculosis (TB) disproportionally affects poor people, leading to income and non-income losses. Measures of socioeconomic impact of TB, e.g. impoverishment and patient costs are inadequate to capture non-income losses. We applied impoverishment and a multidimensional measure on TB and non-TB affected households in Zimbabwe. We conducted a cross-sectional study in 270 households: 90 non-TB; 90 drug-susceptible TB (DS-TB), 90 drug-resistant TB (DR-TB) during the COVID-19 pandemic (2020-2021). Household data included ownership of assets, number of household members, income and indicators on five capital assets: financial, human, social, natural and physical. Households with incomes per capita below US$1.90/day were considered impoverished. We used principal component analysis on five capital asset indicators to create a binary outcome variable indicating loss of livelihood. Log-binomial regression was used to determine associations between loss of livelihood and type of household. TB-affected households were more likely to report episodes of TB and household members requiring care than non-TB households. The proportions of impoverished households were 81% (non-TB), 88% (DS-TB) and 94% (DR-TB) by the time of interview. Overall, 56% (152/270) of households sold assets: 44% (40/90) non-TB, 58% (52/90) DS-TB and 67% (60/90) DR-TB. Children's education was affected in 33% (55/168) of TB-affected compared to 14% (12/88) non-TB households. Overall, 133 (50%) households experienced loss of livelihood, with TB-affected households almost twice as likely to experience loss of livelihood; adjusted prevalence ratio (aPR = 1.78 [95%CI:1.09-2.89]). The effect of TB on livelihood was most pronounced in poorest households (aPR = 2.61, [95%CI:1.47-4.61]). TB-affected households experienced greater socioeconomic losses compared to non-TB households. Multisectoral social protection is crucial to mitigate impacts of TB and other shocks, especially targeting poorest households.
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.