Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32072022›Full record

ReviewJournal of clinical tuberculosis and other mycobacterial diseases2020

Closing gaps in the tuberculosis care cascade: an action-oriented research agenda.

Ramnath Subbaraman, Tulip Jhaveri, Ruvandhi R Nathavitharana

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of clinical tuberculosis and other mycobacterial diseases, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 75 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
75citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.4field-weighted citation impact, top 11% of its field
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

75 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 107 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Observational
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

15 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Ramnath SubbaramanDepartment of Public Health and Community Medicine and Center for Global Public Health, Tufts University School of Medicine, Boston, USA.
Tulip JhaveriDivision of Geographic Medicine and Infectious Diseases, Tufts Medical Center, Boston, USA.
Ruvandhi R NathavitharanaDivision of Infectious Diseases, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center and Harvard Medical School, Boston, USA.
Harvard University · USTufts Medical Center · USTufts University · US

Funding

Research Mentoring and Building Capacity of underrepresented Minority Research Scientists in India.D43TW010540 · FIC · YALE UNIVERSITY · PI MICHELE BARRY, Eva Harris · 2017 to 2026
$15.5M
Optimizing Diagnostic Strategies for TB Transmission Control in Health-Care FacilitiesK23AI132648 · NIAID · BETH ISRAEL DEACONESS MEDICAL CENTER · PI NATHAVITHARANA, RUVANDHI · 2018 to 2022
$945k
Doris Duke Charitable Foundation 2018095FIC NIH HHS D43 TW010540NIAID NIH HHS K23 AI132648
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The care cascade-which evaluates outcomes across stages of patient engagement in a health system-is an important framework for assessing quality of tuberculosis (TB) care. In recent years, there has been progress in measuring care cascades in high TB burden countries; however, there are still shortcomings in our knowledge of how to reduce poor patient outcomes. In this paper, we outline a research agenda for understanding why patients fall through the cracks in the care cascade. The pathway for evidence generation will require new systematic reviews, observational cohort studies, intervention development and testing, and continuous quality improvement initiatives embedded within national TB programs. Certain gaps, such as pretreatment loss to follow-up and post-treatment disease recurrence, should be a priority given a relative paucity of high-quality research to understand and address poor outcomes. Research on interventions to reduce death and loss to follow-up during treatment should move beyond a focus on monitoring (or observation) strategies, to address patient needs including psychosocial and nutritional support. While key research questions vary for each gap, some patient populations may experience disparities across multiple stages of care and should be a priority for research, including men, individuals with a prior treatment history, and individuals with drug-resistant TB. Closing gaps in the care cascade will require investments in a bold and innovative action-oriented research agenda.

Indexed as

Cascade of careContinuum of careMedication adherencePretreatment loss to follow-upResearch agendaTuberculosis

Identifiers

PMID32072022
PMCPMC7015982
OpenAlexW3000534932

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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 Socratic graph.