↓ Skip to main content

Towards better guidance on caseload thresholds to promote positive tuberculosis treatment outcomes: a cohort study

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Medicine, March 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (85th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (51st percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
policy
1 policy source
twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
1 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
38 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Towards better guidance on caseload thresholds to promote positive tuberculosis treatment outcomes: a cohort study
Published in
BMC Medicine, March 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12916-016-0592-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Helen R. Stagg, Ibrahim Abubakar, James Brown, Maeve K. Lalor, H. Lucy Thomas, Tehreem Mohiyuddin, Debora Pedrazzoli, Corinne S. Merle

Abstract

In low-incidence countries, clinical experience of tuberculosis is becoming more limited, with potential consequences for patient outcomes. In 2007, the Department of Health released a guidance 'toolkit' recommending that tuberculosis patients in England should not be solely managed by clinicians who see fewer than 10 cases per year. This caseload threshold was established to try to improve treatment outcomes and reduce transmission, but was not evidence based. We aimed to assess the association between clinician or hospital caseload and treatment outcomes, as well as the relative suitability of making recommendations using each caseload parameter. Demographic and clinical data for tuberculosis cases in England notified to Public Health England's Enhanced Tuberculosis Surveillance system between 2003 and 2012 were extracted. Mean clinician and hospital caseload over the past 3 years were calculated and treatment outcomes grouped into good/neutral and unfavourable. Caseloads over time and their relationship with outcomes were described and analysed using random effects logistic regression, adjusted for clustering. In a fully adjusted multivariable model (34,707 cases)there was very strong evidence that management of tuberculosis by clinicians with fewer than 10 cases per year was associated with greater odds of an unfavourable outcome compared to clinicians who managed greater numbers of cases (cluster-specific odds ratio, 1.14; 95 % confidence interval, 1.05-1.25; P = 0.002). The relationship between hospital caseload and treatment outcomes was more complex and modified by a patient's place of birth and ethnicity. The clinician caseload association held after adjustment for hospital caseload and when the clinician caseload threshold was reduced down to one. Despite the relative ease of making recommendations at the hospital level and the greater reliability of recorded hospital versus named clinician, our results suggest that clinician caseload thresholds are more suitable for clinical guidance. The current recommended clinician caseload threshold is functional. Sensitivity analyses reducing the threshold indicated that clinical experience is pertinent even at very low average caseloads, which is encouraging for low burden settings.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 38 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 38 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 5 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 8%
Student > Postgraduate 2 5%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 5%
Student > Bachelor 2 5%
Other 7 18%
Unknown 17 45%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 8 21%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 13%
Immunology and Microbiology 2 5%
Arts and Humanities 1 3%
Psychology 1 3%
Other 1 3%
Unknown 20 53%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 12. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 28 June 2017.
All research outputs
#2,700,541
of 23,505,064 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medicine
#1,681
of 3,555 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#44,346
of 302,040 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medicine
#26
of 52 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,505,064 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 88th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,555 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 44.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 52% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 302,040 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 52 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 51% of its contemporaries.