Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41146044›Full record

ArticleBMC infectious diseases2025

Importance of confirmatory test characteristics in optimizing community-based screening for tuberculosis: an epidemiological modeling analysis.

Lukas E Brümmer, Theresa S Ryckman, Sourya Shrestha, Florian M Marx, William Worodria, Devasahayam J Christopher, Grant Theron, Adithya Cattamanchi, Claudia M Denkinger, David W Dowdy and 1 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC infectious diseases, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors.

Lukas E BrümmerDepartment of Infectious Disease and Tropical Medicine, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany. lukas.bruemmer@stud.uni-heidelberg.de.
Theresa S RyckmanCenter for Tuberculosis Research, Division of Infectious Diseases, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA.
Sourya ShresthaDepartment of Epidemiology, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD, USA.
Florian M MarxDepartment of Infectious Disease and Tropical Medicine, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany.
William WorodriaDepartment of Medicine, Mulago National Referral Hospital, Kampala, Uganda.
Devasahayam J ChristopherDepartment of Pulmonary Medicine, Christian Medical College, Vellore, India.
Grant TheronDSI-NRF Centre of Excellence for Biomedical Tuberculosis Research, Division of Molecular Biology and Human Genetics, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Stellenbosch University, Cape Town, South Africa.
Adithya CattamanchiDivision of Pulmonary Diseases and Critical Care Medicine, University of California Irvine, Irvine, CA, USA.
Claudia M DenkingerDepartment of Infectious Disease and Tropical Medicine, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany.
David W DowdyDepartment of Epidemiology, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD, USA.
Emily A KendallDepartment of Epidemiology, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe costs, operational barriers, and sensitivity of available tools to confirm a TB diagnosis limit current active case-finding (ACF) efforts for tuberculosis (TB). However, it is not well understood which of these limitations have the greatest epidemiological relevance and might therefore warrant prioritization in confirmatory test development.

methodsTo explore which features of the confirmatory testing step most influence the impact of ACF, we developed a state-transition model of a one-time, community-based ACF campaign, with a fixed budget of one million United States dollars for screening and confirmatory testing, assuming an adult target population with four times the national prevalence of Uganda. We compared TB diagnoses, mortality, and transmission when conducting ACF with a currently available confirmatory test (mirroring sputum-based Xpert Ultra) versus ACF with an improved confirmatory test, i.e., (1) increased sensitivity (from 69% to 80%), (2) non-sputum specimen type (increasing specimen availability from 93% to 100%), (3) immediate turn-around of test results at the point-of-care (increasing delivery of positive results from 91% to 100%), or (4) reduced costs (from $20 to $10 per confirmatory test).

resultsIn a simulated target population of 500,000 adults, 8,029 (1.6%; 95% uncertainty range [UR] 6,634-9,380) had TB disease, and 1,136 (789-1,586) were projected to die of TB in the absence of ACF. Assuming current tests, ACF could reach 149,811 (90,834 - 217,928; 30% of the target population) people under the allotted budget, connecting 1,151 (676-1,813) individuals with TB to treatment and averting 135 (64-249) deaths. Higher diagnostic sensitivity most increased the number of people with TB who received treatment as a result of ACF (by 15% [5-27%]). However, improvements that could benefit individuals regardless of their sputum bacillary load, such as reduced test costs, achieved larger reductions in mortality (11% [4-36%]).

conclusionDue to greater detection of individuals with high bacillary load, making confirmatory tests for community-based TB screening less expensive and more accessible may lead to greater population health benefits than further increasing test sensitivity. Nonetheless, achieving large (> 20%) increases in the health impact of ACF will require improvements to components of ACF other than the confirmatory diagnostic test.

Indexed as

Mass ScreeningTuberculosisAdultEpidemiological ModelsHumansPrevalenceSensitivity and SpecificitySputumUgandaActive case-findingConfirmatory testingEpidemiological modelingTuberculosis

Identifiers

PMID41146044
PMCPMC12560579

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.