ReviewPublic health in practice (Oxford, England)2026
A scoping review of interventions in childhood tuberculosis prevention and treatment.
Review in Public health in practice (Oxford, England), 2026. 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
Objective: This scoping review aims to identify and map the available evidence on interventions for the prevention and treatment of childhood TB, confirm current practice, explore variation, and identify emerging approaches. Study design: Scoping review. Method: This scoping review was conducted using established methods and reported in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR) checklist. The protocol was registered with the Open Science Framework. Selection criteria were defined using the PCC framework, including population (children aged 0-18 years), concept (prevention and treatment of tuberculosis), and context (global settings). Studies with control groups were included, such as randomised controlled trials (RCTs), quasi-experimental studies, cohort studies, case-control studies, and cross-sectional studies. Electronic databases (PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, Cochrane Library, and EMBASE) and websites of global health agencies (e.g., USAID, UNICEF, WHO, and CDC) were searched. Results: Following a comprehensive search and screening process, 41 studies were included. Of these, 15 were conducted in the African region (with South Africa contributing the most, n = 7), followed by Southeast Asia (n = 12), Europe (n = 6), the Western Pacific (n = 4), the Eastern Mediterranean (Pakistan, n = 2), the Americas (USA, n = 1), and one multi-country study. Eighteen studies focused on TB prevention, 22 on treatment, and one on both. The review found that combining pharmaceutical and non-pharmaceutical interventions improved prevention outcomes, with treatment completion rates reaching up to 99% and reductions in mortality. The BCG vaccine showed variable efficacy (22-92%), with over 70% protection against TB meningitis reported in several regions. Treatment success rates for drug-sensitive TB reached up to 97%. New regimens incorporating bedaquiline and delamanid for multidrug-resistant (MDR-TB) and extensively drug-resistant TB (XDR-TB) showed cure rates as high as 94.6%. Conclusion: Overall, shorter treatment regimens were associated with higher completion rates, although evidence on long-term cure remains limited.
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.