ArticlePublic health action2026
Food support for tuberculosis care: coverage, outcomes, and implementation lessons from the
Article in Public health action, 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
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
settingVadodara City (Gujarat, India) has a mixed public-private tuberculosis (TB) care landscape. Since 2022, the city has implemented '
objectiveTo assess coverage (received at least one kit) and effectiveness of Ni-kshay Mitra on treatment outcomes, and explore implementation facilitators, barriers, and solutions from the stakeholders' perspective.
designExplanatory mixed-methods study: quantitative cohort analysis of secondary programme data followed by qualitative interviews and focus group discussions with donors (n = 3), programme staff (n = 18), and PwTB (n = 35).
resultsAmong 2,068 PwTB notified between January and June 2025, 1,238 (60%) consented to the scheme, 666 (32%) received ≥1 food kit, and 68 (3%) received complete package (≥6 kits). Median kits received were 2 (interquartile range: 2-4). Unsuccessful treatment outcomes were 7% (2022, pre-scheme) and 6% (2023, post-scheme), not statistically significant. Donor non-availability and opportunity costs of attending camps were the major barriers; presence of dedicated non-profit organisations was a key facilitator.
conclusionCoverage of
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.