ArticlePublic health in practice (Oxford, England)2025
Using chest X-ray to screen for Tuberculosis on arrival to prison: A service evaluation.
Article in Public health in practice (Oxford, England), 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
Objectives: Chest X-ray (CXR) is recommended by the World Health Organization as a TB screening tool on admission to prison. We piloted the offer of CXR on admission to prison to understand if it was acceptable to residents, feasible to deliver within 48 h of admission, and to inform TB epidemiology. Study design: Cross-sectional. Methods: Between 1 September 2023 and 31 March 2024, CXRs were offered to new prison admissions. We measured the numbers accepting, numbers completed and the results. For each person accepting the CXR we undertook an assessment of clinical and social TB risks. We measured the time taken to deliver the CXR and receive results. Results: CXR was acceptable to those in prison with 61.0 % (n = 310) of new admissions accepting the offer. Of those accepting the offer, 226 (72.9 %) went on to receive a CXR, equating to 44.5 % of all new arrivals within the pilot period. A quarter of those accepting the CXR offer did not attend their first appointment and needed further appointment offers. We observed that as the number of rearranged appointments increased the number of men attending decreased. The total median number of days from arrival at the prison to completion of CXR was 17 [IQR 13-20 days]. We did not identify any respiratory TB, however nine (4.0 %) CXRs were abnormal. Conclusions: CXR screening was acceptable to prison residents but we could not achieve delivery within 48 h of arrival to prison. We identified other respiratory abnormalities suggesting CXR screening could be used as a wider respiratory health screen of which TB would be included.
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.