ArticlePLOS global public health2024
Treatment preferences among people at risk of developing tuberculosis: A discrete choice experiment.
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 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.
- Linkage to TB and HIV care for persons who smoke illicit drugs: a prospective cohort study.IJTLD open · 2026Article
- Patient preferences for empiric TB treatment initiation.The international journal of tuberculosis and lung disease : the official journal of the International Union against Tuberculosis and Lung Disease · 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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Diagnosing and treating people with bacteriologically-negative but radiologically-apparent tuberculosis (TB) may contribute to more effective TB care and reduce transmission. However, optimal treatment approaches for this group are unknown. It is important to understand peoples' preferences of treatment options for effective programmatic implementation of people-centred treatment approaches. We designed and implemented a discrete choice experiment (DCE) to solicit treatment preferences among adults (≥18 years) with TB symptoms attending a primary health clinic in Blantyre, Malawi. Treatment attributes included in the DCE were as follows: duration of treatment; number of tablets per dose; reduction in the risk of being unwell with TB disease; likelihood of infecting others; adverse effects from the treatment; frequency of follow up; and the annual travel cost to access care. Quantitative choice modelling with multinomial logit models estimated through frequentist and Bayesian approaches investigated preferences for the management of bacteriologically-negative, but radiographically-apparent TB. 128 participants were recruited (57% male, 43.8% HIV-positive, 8.6% previously treated for TB). Participants preferred to take any treatment compared to not taking treatment (odds ratio [OR] 5.78; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 2.40, 13.90). Treatments that reduced the relative risk of developing TB disease by 80% were preferred (OR: 2.97; 95% CI: 2.09, 4.21) compared to treatments that lead to a lower reduction in risk of 50%. However, there was no evidence for treatments that are 95% effective being preferred over those that are 80% effective. Participants strongly favoured the treatments that could completely stop transmission (OR: 7.87, 95% CI: 5.71, 10.84), and prioritised avoiding side effects (OR: 0.19, 95% CI: 0.12, 0.29). There was no evidence of an interaction between perceived TB disease risk and treatment preferences. In summary, participants were primarily concerned with the effectiveness of TB treatments and strongly preferred treatments that removed the risk of onward transmission. Person-centred approaches of preferences for treatment should be considered when designing new treatment strategies. Understanding treatment preferences will ensure that any recommended treatment for probable early TB disease is well accepted and utilized by the public.
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.