ArticleBMJ open2025
Effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of community-based TB screening algorithms using computer-aided detection (CAD) technology alone compared with CAD combined with point-of-care C reactive protein testing in Lesotho and South Africa: protocol for a paired screen-positive trial.
Article in BMJ open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05526885 (Tuberculosis Diagnostic Trial of CAD4TB Screening Alone Compared to CAD4TB Screening Combined With a CRP Triage Test, Both Followed by Confirmatory Xpert MTB/RIF Ultra in Communities of Lesotho and South Africa), which is not on this map. Cited by 5 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.
Tuberculosis Diagnostic Trial of CAD4TB Screening Alone Compared to CAD4TB Screening Combined With a CRP Triage Test, Both Followed by Confirmatory Xpert MTB/RIF Ultra in Communities of Lesotho and South Africa
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Artificial Intelligence in Infectious Disease Care: Selected Applications in Tuberculosis, Sepsis, and Antimicrobial Stewardship.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Artificial Intelligence for Tuberculosis Screening and Detection: From Evidence to Policy and Implementation.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Accuracy and Acceptability of the VISITECT CD4 Advanced Disease Test Compared With the PIMA CD4 Test at the Point of Care as Part of the Advanced HIV Disease Care Package: A Mixed-Methods Study.Open forum infectious diseases · 2026Article
- Comparative cost analysis of community-based tuberculosis screening: Computer-Aided Detection (CAD) alone versus CAD with point-of-care C-reactive protein testing in South Africa and Lesotho.PLOS global public health · 2026Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
28 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionTuberculosis (TB) remains a significant public health challenge in many African communities, where underreporting and underdiagnosis are prevalent due to barriers in accessing care and inadequate diagnostic tools. This is particularly concerning in hard-to-reach areas with a high burden of TB/HIV co-infection, where missed or delayed diagnoses exacerbate disease transmission, increase mortality and lead to severe economic and health consequences. To address these challenges, it is crucial to evaluate innovative, cost-effective, community-based screening strategies that can improve early detection and linkage to care. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We conduct a prospective, community-based, diagnostic, pragmatic trial in communities of the Butha Buthe District in Lesotho and the Greater Edendale area of Msunduzi Municipality, KwaZulu-Natal in South Africa to compare two strategies for population-based TB screening: computer-aided detection (CAD) technology alone ( ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The protocol was approved by National Health Research Ethics Committee in Lesotho (NH-REC, ID52-2022), the Human Sciences Research Council Research Ethics Committee (HSRC REC, REC 2/23/09/20) and the Provincial Health Research Committee of the Department of Health of KwaZulu-Natal (KZ_202209_022) in South Africa and from the Swiss Ethics Committee Northwest and Central Switzerland (EKNZ, AO_2022-00044). This manuscript is based on protocol V.4.0, 19 January 2024. Trial findings will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publications, conference presentations and through communication offices of the consortium partners and the project's website (https://tbtriage.com/).
trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov (NCT05526885), South African National Clinical Trials Register (SANCTR; DOH-27-092022-8096).
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.