ArticleIJTLD open2024
Evaluation of a short training course of chest X-ray interpretation for the diagnosis of paediatric TB.
Article in IJTLD open, 2024. 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.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
25 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundChest X-ray (CXR) interpretation is challenging for the diagnosis of paediatric TB. We assessed the performance of a three half-day CXR training module for healthcare workers (HCWs) at low healthcare levels in six high TB incidence countries.
methodsWithin the TB-Speed Decentralization Study, we developed a three half-day training course to identify normal CXR, CXR of good quality and identify six TB-suggestive features. We performed a pre-post training assessment on a pre-defined set of 20 CXR readings. We compared the proportion of correctly interpreted CXRs and the median reading score before and after the training using the McNemar test and a linear mixed model.
resultsOf 191 HCWs, 43 (23%) were physicians, 103 (54%) nurses, 18 (9.4%) radiology technicians and 12 (6.3%) other professionals. Of 2,840 CXRs with both assessment, respectively 1,843 (64.9%) and 2,277 (80.2%) were correctly interpreted during pre-training and post-training (
conclusionDespite some limitations of the course assessment that did not include abnormal non-TB suggestive CXR, study findings suggest that a short CXR training course could improve HCWs' interpretation skills in diagnosing paediatric TB.
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.