Comparison · NCT02808507-ac92c768
Facility-based Screening vs Contact Screening: Treatment Initiation Ratio in Facility Versus Contact Investigation Clinics
Calculated by ConductScience from the counts the trial posted to ClinicalTrials.gov.
2 sourcestrial-comparisons-2026-03-23-0.1.0
Download JSON
Cite this record
ConductScience Library. Facility-based Screening vs Contact Screening: Treatment Initiation Ratio in Facility Versus Contact Investigation Clinics. Trial comparisons, record NCT02808507-ac92c768. Release trial-comparisons-2026-03-23-0.1.0, 23 Mar 2026. https://conductscience.org/library/comparisons/NCT02808507-ac92c768
On this page
Measures6
Calculated by ConductScience from the counts the trial posted to ClinicalTrials.gov.
| Measure | Value | 95% interval, lower | 95% interval, upper | Method | Note |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Risk in group 1 | 1 | 0.998 | 1 | wilson | |
| Risk in group 2 | 1 | 0.998 | 1 | wilson | |
| Risk difference, group 1 minus group 2 | 0 | -0.00199 | 0.00222 | newcombe hybrid score | |
| Risk ratio, group 1 over group 2 | 1 | 1 | 1 | log | |
| Odds ratio, group 1 over group 2 | log | a cell of the two-by-two table is zero | |||
| Number needed to treat | from the risk difference interval | the two groups' risks are equal |
Source ClinicalTrials.gov
Groups2
Neither group, or both, names a comparator, so the groups keep ClinicalTrials.gov's order.
| Group | Title | Description | With the outcome | Analysed | ClinicalTrials.gov code |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Group 1 | Facility-based Screening | This strategy will be implemented at all clinics (n=28) within this arm for 18 months. Study staff will encourage providers at each of the clinics to screen all consenting patients attending the clinic, regardless of the original reason for clinic presentation. Upon presenting for care (e.g., while waiting for their healthcare provider), patients will be informed about the study and screened for cough of any duration, fever, weight loss, or night sweats. Participants who are symptomatic and provide a sputum specimen (according to the clinic standard of care) will be given a study flyer informing them that they may be contacted by study staff, and a brief summary of the study. Per standard of care, all sputum samples will be sent to the local National Health Laboratory Service laboratory for Xpert testing.~Active TB case finding: Active TB case finding (ACF) refers to any number of strategies used to identify individuals with active TB disease, outside of passive case finding. In passive case finding, individuals with symptoms present at health centers for diagnosis. In active case finding, the health system makes an effort to identify TB cases before they present passively. | 1,929 | 1,929 | OG000 |
| Group 2 | Contact Screening | This arm is comprised of two sub-arms:~In the household contact screening sub-arm, a mobile field team visits the household of each consenting newly diagnosed pulmonary TB index case. Each visit consists of a household census, consent of all eligible household members for TB screening, administration of a brief questionnaire, sputum collection for testing with Xpert Mycobacterium tuberculosis (MTB)/rifampin (RIF) and the offer of HIV testing.~In the incentive-based contact screening sub-arm, all consenting newly diagnosed active TB cases are provided with 10 coupons for free TB screening to give to close contacts. When a contact presents at clinic with a coupon, they and the index case each receive a small amount of money. If the contact is diagnosed with active TB and starts treatment, the index case receives an additional larger amount of money. Each contact receives a brief questionnaire, TB symptom screen, optional HIV testing, and sputum sample collection for Xpert MTB/RIF.~Active TB case finding: Active TB case finding (ACF) refers to any number of strategies used to identify individuals with active TB disease, outside of passive case finding. In passive case finding, individuals with symptoms present at health centers for diagnosis. In active case finding, the health system makes an effort to identify TB cases before they present passively. | 1,726 | 1,726 | OG001 |
Source ClinicalTrials.gov
Outcome
- Type
- PRIMARY
- Title
- Treatment Initiation Ratio in Facility Versus Contact Investigation Clinics
- Description
The primary analysis was based on the facility- level rate ratio, and we first calculated an unadjusted ratio of the treatment initiation rates between the two arms and the corresponding 95% confidence interval (CI). We then adjusted for any residual confounding by district stratification and the historical annual number of people started on TB following a two-stage approach. The first step of this approach fits a Poisson regression to the facility-level counts and the district and historical volume covariates irrespective of study arm. The residuals ratios, calculated as the ratio of the observed over the expected counts, are then used in the second stage to estimate the between-arm rate ratio and the corresponding 95% CI.
- Time frame
- 18 months
- Population
The population for this outcome consists of a sub-group of the total study population (those enrolled during the intervention period of July 18,2015 - January 17, 2018). All participants from the facility-based screening arm are included (n=1929), and the participants of the contact screening arm (n=1726) are included (this is a combination from the household-based and incentive-based screening arms).
Source ClinicalTrials.gov
Trial
- Title
- Comparative Effectiveness/Implementation of TB Case Finding in Rural South Africa
- NCT number
- NCT02808507
- Phases
- NA
- Conditions
- Tuberculosis
- Interventions
- Active TB case finding
- Lead sponsor
- Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health
- Results first posted
- 2022-12-02
- Results on ClinicalTrials.gov
- https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT02808507?tab=results
Source ClinicalTrials.gov
Source
- Release
- trial-comparisons-2026-03-23-0.1.0
- Release manifest SHA-256
- f66225897fbf258b57ea10bdacfd0347d3cdfda93f7f5685234b7e06ea36fa57
- AACT copy
- 2026-03-23
- Tables read
- outcome_counts.parquet, outcome_measurements.parquet, outcomes.parquet, reported_event_totals.parquet, reported_events.parquet, result_groups.parquet, studies.parquet, ctgov_trial.parquet
Source ClinicalTrials.gov
Sources 2
- ClinicalTrials.gov's posted results, through CTTI's AACTFreely available. Acknowledgement requested
- ClinicalTrials.govNo license stated
Each source's terms
- ClinicalTrials.gov's posted results, through CTTI's AACTClinicalTrials.gov data via Aggregate Analysis of ClinicalTrials.gov (AACT), CTTI. CTTI makes its materials freely available and requests acknowledgement. https://aact.ctti-clinicaltrials.org/documentation/299
- ClinicalTrials.govnone stated
ClinicalTrials.gov's data carry an international copyright outside the United States: https://clinicaltrials.gov/about-site/terms-conditions. The measures are ConductScience's calculation from them.
For software
Read this comparison from software.
The record is JSON. No key.
GET https://conductscience.org/api/comparisons/v1/NCT02808507-ac92c768