ArticlePLOS global public health2025
Provider perspectives on empirical antibiotic treatment for tuberculosis-like symptoms in South Africa's private general practice sector: A qualitative study in two cities.
Article in PLOS global public health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
While tuberculosis (TB) in South Africa is commonly treated in the public sector, some clients first seek care in the private sector. Research has demonstrated that private general practitioners (GPs) perform less well than do public sector care providers in TB testing and drug-dispensing practices. We aimed to describe GPs' decision-making practices related to empiric antibiotic treatment when presented with symptoms that may be related to TB, to inform potential interventions. Within a larger study on private sector TB management, we qualitatively interviewed 30 purposively selected GPs, who varied by gender, age, practice community, and how they managed TB and HIV in the parent study. Data were analysed through coding and constant comparison. GPs acknowledged the common use of broad-spectrum antibiotics for respiratory symptoms, driven by experience treating presumed bacterial infections and by a desire to rule out other causes before referring clients for potentially inconvenient TB tests in the private or public sector. Management decisions were susceptible to perceived or expressed pressure from clients, who may expect on-the-spot treatment. Additionally, GPs indicated using antibiotics to mitigate financial strain on economically vulnerable clients. Empirical antibiotic treatment for presentations that may be related to TB in the private sector, which can delay TB diagnosis, could be explained by the absence of accessible and affordable TB and general bacteriologic tests at the point of care, leading GPs to, among others, seek to 'rule out' possible bacterial infection. Potential interventions include increasing the salience of inappropriate antibiotic use, heightening GPs' suspicion index for TB, and linking GPs directly to public sector TB tests for clients.
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.