ArticleInfectious diseases of poverty2025
Patient experiences of tuberculosis treatment deferral after a trace Xpert Ultra result: a prospective cohort study.
Article in Infectious diseases of poverty, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Global burden of MDR-TB and XDR-TB: trends, inequities, and future implications for public health planning.BMC infectious diseases · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
- Update of
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundA "trace" result from the Xpert Ultra molecular tuberculosis test indicates Mycobacterium tuberculosis DNA detection but may not always signify tuberculosis disease. Little is known about the experiences of individuals with trace results who are not immediately treated. We surveyed patients with trace results to better understand their experiences and preferences related to their uncertain tuberculosis status.
methodsWe enrolled adults and adolescents with trace Xpert Ultra sputum results, plus individuals with positive (at a semiquantitative level greater than trace) results ("positive controls") and with negative results ("negative controls"), from community-screening and clinic settings in Kampala, Uganda between February 2021 and December 2024. After an extensive clinical, laboratory, and radiographic evaluation, participants not recommended to start tuberculosis treatment immediately were closely monitored with interval reassessments. Starting in September 2021, surveys captured participants' perceptions and preferences related to their uncertain tuberculosis status at baseline and one and six months later. We compared categorial variables using Pearson's chi-squared test or Fisher's exact test with a significance level of 0.05.
resultsA total of 329 people with trace sputum (PWTS), 241 positive controls, and 279 negative controls were enrolled. Among PWTS surveyed, 22% (28/129) and 23% (30/129) thought they were likely to have or develop tuberculosis, respectively, and most reported low associated anxiety initially (80%, 263/329) and during follow-up. While 53% (174/329) would have favored treatment at baseline if not in the study, only 30% (41/136) of those who remained untreated were inclined toward treatment at six months. Participants chose a sensitive hypothetical test, even with high false-positivity risk, over one with lower sensitivity.
conclusionsMost PWTS in our study reported a low self-perceived likelihood of having or developing tuberculosis and low anxiety during follow up. Deferring treatment for PWTS is acceptable to most patients when sufficient testing and monitoring are available; in other contexts, upfront treatment may be preferable.
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.