Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39174285›Full record

Trial reportThe European respiratory journal2024

Treatment of latent tuberculosis infection in migrants in primary care

Matthew Burman, Dominik Zenner, Andrew J Copas, Lara Goscé, Hassan Haghparast-Bidgoli, Peter J White, Vicky Hickson, Opal Greyson, Duncan Trathen, Richard Ashcroft and 4 more

Registry-linked trialAbstract readRandomized Controlled TrialPragmatic Clinical TrialComparative Study
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in The European respiratory journal, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03069807 (Can Latent Tuberculosis Infection), which is not on this map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

NCT03069807 nacompletednot on this map

Can Latent Tuberculosis Infection (LTBI) in Recent Migrants be Treated Effectively and Safely in Primary Care? A Cluster Randomised Controlled Trial.

TypeinterventionalSponsorQueen Mary University of LondonRan2017 to 2020Enrolled362ConditionsLatent TuberculosisArmsCommunity/Primary Care, Hospital/TB Clinic
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

14 authors.

Matthew BurmanWolfson Institute of Population Health, Barts and The London School of Medicine and Dentistry, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK.
Dominik ZennerWolfson Institute of Population Health, Barts and The London School of Medicine and Dentistry, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK.
Andrew J CopasInstitute for Global Health, University College London, London, UK.
Lara GoscéInstitute for Global Health, University College London, London, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2392-6271
Hassan Haghparast-BidgoliInstitute for Global Health, University College London, London, UK.
Peter J WhiteMRC Centre for Global Infectious Disease Analysis and NIHR Health Protection Research Unit in Modelling and Health Economics, Department of Infectious Disease Epidemiology, Imperial College London, London, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6644-3512
Vicky HicksonWolfson Institute of Population Health, Barts and The London School of Medicine and Dentistry, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK.
Opal GreysonWolfson Institute of Population Health, Barts and The London School of Medicine and Dentistry, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK.
Duncan TrathenNewham Clinical Commissioning Group, London, UK.
Richard AshcroftCity Law School, City, University of London, London, UK.
Adrian R MartineauWolfson Institute of Population Health, Barts and The London School of Medicine and Dentistry, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK.
Ibrahim AbubakarInstitute for Global Health, University College London, London, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0370-1430
Christopher J GriffithsWolfson Institute of Population Health, Barts and The London School of Medicine and Dentistry, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK.
Heinke KunstBlizard Institute, Barts and The London School of Medicine and Dentistry, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK h.kunst@qmul.ac.uk.

Funding

Medical Research Council MR/X020258/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundControl of latent tuberculosis infection (LTBI) is a priority in the World Health Organization strategy to eliminate TB. Many high-income, low TB incidence countries have prioritised LTBI screening and treatment in recent migrants. We tested whether a novel model of care, based entirely within primary care, was effective and safe compared to secondary care.

methodsThis was a pragmatic cluster-randomised, parallel group, superiority trial (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03069807) conducted in 34 general practices in London, UK, comparing LTBI treatment in recent migrants in primary care to secondary care. The primary outcome was treatment completion, defined as taking ≥90% of antibiotic doses. Secondary outcomes included treatment acceptance, adherence, adverse effects, patient satisfaction, TB incidence and a cost-effectiveness analysis. Analyses were performed on an intention-to-treat basis.

resultsBetween September 2016 and May 2019, 362 recent migrants with LTBI were offered treatment and 276 accepted. Treatment completion was similar in primary and secondary care (82.6%

conclusionsThe treatment of LTBI in recent migrants within primary care does not result in higher rates of treatment completion but is safe and costs less when compared to secondary care.

Indexed as

Antitubercular AgentsCost-Benefit AnalysisLatent TuberculosisPrimary Health CareSecondary Health CareTransients and MigrantsAdolescentAdultFemaleHumansLondonMaleMedication AdherenceMiddle AgedYoung AdultAntitubercular Agents

Identifiers

PMID39174285
PMCPMC11540984

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.