Contamination effects in cluster randomised trials of TB interventions.

IF 3.1 3区 医学 Q2 INFECTIOUS DISEASES
K E LeGrand, K Allel, P Khan, R J Hayes, R G White, N McCreesh
{"title":"Contamination effects in cluster randomised trials of TB interventions.","authors":"K E LeGrand, K Allel, P Khan, R J Hayes, R G White, N McCreesh","doi":"10.5588/ijtld.24.0275","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>BACKGROUND: Cluster randomised trials (CRTs) of TB interventions have achieved mixed results, with many lacking significant reductions in outcomes. Contamination in CRTs, resulting from short and long-term movement between clusters and the general population, may dilute the impact of measured intervention.METHODS: We systematically reviewed the literature to identify CRTs that aimed to capture the population-level effects of the intervention on TB. Details of trial designs, interventions, outcomes, populations, cluster configurations, and geographic data were extracted to produce text summaries, descriptive statistics, and spatial analyses. RESULTS: We screened 1,039 abstracts and included 20 reports from seven CRTs. The median number of clusters was 32 (IQR 23-61), with populations ranging from 400-50,000 individuals per cluster. Four trials reported spatial data, from which the mean distance between clusters was 12.3 km (range 3.71-35.9). Several trials acknowledged design limitations, such as small cluster sizes and population mobility, which could have led to underestimations of intervention impact. Trials used various geographic, social, and pre-existing TB measures to select and allocate study clusters. Data on the potential for contamination are inconsistent.CONCLUSION: Gaps remain in the reporting of methods and results, suggesting necessary improvements to standardised reporting tools. These insights can inform recommendations for improved CRT design and reporting practices.</p>","PeriodicalId":14411,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Tuberculosis and Lung Disease","volume":"29 2","pages":"47-53"},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Tuberculosis and Lung Disease","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5588/ijtld.24.0275","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"INFECTIOUS DISEASES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Cluster randomised trials (CRTs) of TB interventions have achieved mixed results, with many lacking significant reductions in outcomes. Contamination in CRTs, resulting from short and long-term movement between clusters and the general population, may dilute the impact of measured intervention.METHODS: We systematically reviewed the literature to identify CRTs that aimed to capture the population-level effects of the intervention on TB. Details of trial designs, interventions, outcomes, populations, cluster configurations, and geographic data were extracted to produce text summaries, descriptive statistics, and spatial analyses. RESULTS: We screened 1,039 abstracts and included 20 reports from seven CRTs. The median number of clusters was 32 (IQR 23-61), with populations ranging from 400-50,000 individuals per cluster. Four trials reported spatial data, from which the mean distance between clusters was 12.3 km (range 3.71-35.9). Several trials acknowledged design limitations, such as small cluster sizes and population mobility, which could have led to underestimations of intervention impact. Trials used various geographic, social, and pre-existing TB measures to select and allocate study clusters. Data on the potential for contamination are inconsistent.CONCLUSION: Gaps remain in the reporting of methods and results, suggesting necessary improvements to standardised reporting tools. These insights can inform recommendations for improved CRT design and reporting practices.

结核干预措施聚类随机试验中的污染效应。
背景:结核病干预措施的整群随机试验(CRTs)取得了不同的结果,其中许多没有显著降低结果。由于在集群和一般人群之间的短期和长期移动,crt中的污染可能会稀释测量干预的影响。方法:我们系统地回顾了文献,以确定旨在捕捉结核病干预的人群水平效应的crt。提取试验设计、干预措施、结果、人群、集群配置和地理数据的详细信息,以生成文本摘要、描述性统计和空间分析。结果我们筛选了1039篇摘要,包括来自7个ct的20篇报告。群数中位数为32 (IQR 23-61),种群数量在400-50,000之间。4个试验报告了空间数据,聚类之间的平均距离为12.3 km(范围3.71-35.9)。一些试验承认设计上的局限性,如小集群规模和人口流动性,这可能导致干预影响的低估。试验使用各种地理、社会和预先存在的结核病措施来选择和分配研究群。关于潜在污染的数据不一致。结论在报告方法和结果方面仍存在差距,建议对标准化报告工具进行必要的改进。这些见解可以为改进CRT设计和报告实践提供建议。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.90
自引率
20.00%
发文量
266
审稿时长
2 months
期刊介绍: The International Journal of Tuberculosis and Lung Disease publishes articles on all aspects of lung health, including public health-related issues such as training programmes, cost-benefit analysis, legislation, epidemiology, intervention studies and health systems research. The IJTLD is dedicated to the continuing education of physicians and health personnel and the dissemination of information on tuberculosis and lung health world-wide.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信