ArticlePloS one2024
Exploring the perspectives of healthcare workers and Program managers on the use of Truenat as a new tool for TB and DR-TB diagnosis in Nigeria: A qualitative study.
Article in PloS one, 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.
- Article
- Reaching the 100 by 2027 target for universal access to rapid molecular diagnostic tests for tuberculosis in Africa: In-sight but out of reach.PLOS global public health · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
17 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundWorld Health Organization in the year 2020 recommended the use of Truenat as a replacement for smear microscopy in Tuberculosis (TB) diagnosis and detection of rifampicin resistance. This study was designed to assess enablers and barriers to effective implementation of Truenat assays for TB diagnosis in Nigeria and determine the acceptability of use of Truenat among healthcare workers and TB Program managers in Nigeria.
methodsA descriptive exploratory study design was used. Qualitative data were collected via Zoom platform using a pre-tested focus group discussion (FGD) guide and key informant interview (KII) guide. Four FGDs were conducted among Truenat laboratory staff, State Quality Assurance Officers, Local Government Tuberculosis Supervisors and Clinicians working at Truenat sites. Three KIIs were conducted among laboratory leads of Truenat implementing partners and the National TB Control Program.
resultsAll the participants attested to the reliability and acceptability of Truenat results, they also highlighted the portability and ease-of-use especially for community outreach testing. Stakeholder engagement, training of Truenat laboratory staff and the perceived low operational cost associated with Truenat were the enablers of Truenat implementation. Major barriers to the implementation included human resource for health constraints, lack of power supply, frequent Trueprep breakdown and Truenat machine connectivity. The same human resource constraint was viewed as the major barrier to scale up of Truenat while employment and retention of Truenat staff coupled with training were seen as the facilitators to scale-up. The participants implored the manufacturers of Truenat to increase the number of modules for Truenat, enable the use of stool for diagnosis of TB and attach a solar panel to the machine.
conclusionTruenat has gained high acceptance among health workers and TB Program managers in Nigeria. The perceived low operational cost and low infrastructural requirements have been a major boost. There is a need to ensure the retention of health workers especially the Truenat laboratory staff. Training should be sustained including the payment of incentives. Increasing the number of modules of the Truenat machine, enabling the use of stool for TB diagnosis and having a solar panel attached to Truenat machine are essential.
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.