ArticlePloS one2025
Methodologies for studying depression in persons living with tuberculosis: Protocol for a scoping review.
Article in PloS one, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Tuberculosis (TB) and depression frequently co-occur, yet research has largely focused on prevalence rather than diagnostic or treatment methodologies. Given overlapping symptoms, robust research approaches are critical for improving detection and treatment strategies in persons with TB (PWTB). This protocol defines a scoping review that aims to map methodologies used to study depression in individuals with TB, identifying gaps in research design, diagnosis, and treatment that may hinder clinical and public health advancements. A search was conducted in MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, Global Health, Cochrane Library, and Africa-Wide Information using controlled vocabulary related to TB and depression. Studies examining the TB-depression relationship will be included. We will use Covidence to facilitate screening, selection, and data extraction. We will extract data on study design, diagnostic tools, treatment interventions, and analytical approaches. Descriptive characteristics of included studies will be presented using figures and tables. Using the Reach-Effectiveness-Adoption-Implementation-Maintenance (RE-AIM) framework, we will evaluate reach by assessing the extent to which studies explore both directions of the TB-depression relationship and include diverse, high-risk populations. Effectiveness will be examined by categorizing study designs to assess methodological diversity and evaluating the diagnostic tools and treatment interventions used, along with their reported efficacy. Adoption will be analyzed by identifying where and by whom depression diagnosis and treatment methodologies have been implemented and whether research findings have influenced clinical guidelines or public health policies. Implementation will be assessed by identifying barriers and facilitators reported in qualitative studies or by researchers regarding the integration of depression care into TB treatment settings. Finally, maintenance will be determined by examining whether diagnostic and treatment methodologies were sustained within health systems, including long-term patient outcomes and the persistence of interventions beyond the research phase. By mapping existing methodologies and identifying research gaps, this review will provide valuable insights to guide future research study designs and improve diagnostic and treatment strategies for depression in PWTB.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.