Cited by 8Tuberculosis Research and EpidemiologyPoverty, Education, and Child WelfareHealthcare Systems and Reforms

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 30 of the 30 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Evaluating the impact of cash transfers on tuberculosis (ExaCT TB): a stepped wedge cluster randomised controlled trial

Open access

Abstract

Background: Mitigating financial barriers to tuberculosis (TB) diagnosis and treatment is a core priority of the global TB agenda. We evaluated the impact of a cash transfer intervention on completion of TB testing and treatment initiation in Uganda. Methods: We conducted a pragmatic complete stepped wedge randomised trial of a one-time unconditional cash transfer at 10 health centres between September 2019 and March 2020. People referred for sputum-based TB testing were enrolled to receive UGX 20 000 (∼USD 5.39) upon sputum submission. The primary outcome was the number initiating treatment for micro-bacteriologically confirmed TB within 2 weeks of initial evaluation. The primary analysis included cluster-level intent-to-treat and per-protocol analyses using negative binomial regression. Results: 4288 people were eligible. The number diagnosed with TB initiating treatment was higher in the intervention period versus the pre-intervention period (adjusted rate ratio (aRR)=1.34) with a 95% CI of 0.62–2.91 (p=0.46), indicating a wide range of plausible true intervention effects. More were referred for TB testing (aRR=2.60, 95% CI 1.86–3.62; p<0.001) and completed TB testing (aRR=3.22, 95% CI 1.37–7.60; p=0.007) per National Guidelines. Results were similar but attenuated in per-protocol analyses. Surveys revealed that while the cash transfer supported testing completion, it was insufficient to address long-term underlying social/economic barriers. Interpretation: While it is uncertain whether a single unconditional cash transfer increased the number of people diagnosed and treated for TB, it did support higher completion of diagnostic evaluation in a programmatic setting. A one-time cash transfer may offset some but not all of the social/economic barriers to improving TB diagnosis outcomes.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1183/23120541.00182-2023

Cites

30 of 30 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The stepped wedge design in Shete et al. 2023 was likely chosen to ensure that all clusters eventually receive the intervention while also allowing for a comparison between pre-intervention and intervention periods.

    “The stepped wedge design was likely chosen to ensure that all clusters eventually receive the intervention while also allowing for a comparison between pre-intervention and intervention periods”
  • Eligible health centers in Shete et al. 2023 were randomized using a simple, unrestricted two-stage process. First, they were matched into clusters based on pre-randomization data of patient volume. Second, clusters were randomly assigned into the sequence order in which they would switch into the intervention period during a stakeholder-led randomization ceremony whereby health center代表 chose a编号

    “Eligible health centers were randomized using a simple, unrestricted two-stage process. First, they were matched into clusters based on pre-randomization data of patient volume. Second, clusters were randomly assigned into the sequence order in which they would switch into the intervention period during a stakeholder-led randomization ceremony whereby health center representatives chose a numbered”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Shete, P. B., Kadota, J. L., Nanyunja, G., Namale, C., Nalugwa, T., Oyuku, D., Turyahabwe, S., Kiwanuka, N., Cattamanchi, A., & Katamba, A.
Affiliations
  • University of California, San Francisco (US)
  • Makerere University (UG)
Corresponding author
Shete, Priya B.
Venue
ERJ Open Research
Published
2023-05
Volume
9
Issue
3
Pages
00182-2023
ISSN
2312-0541 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4379053221
Cited by
8
References
30
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 2
FWCI
1.66
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • ERJ Open Research (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • eScholarship (California Digital Library) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Funders
  • UCSF-Gladstone Center for AIDS Research Mentored Science Award in HIV/AIDS Research (NIH P30 AI027763 Award A120163)
  • Parker B. Francis Fellowship (P0523744)
  • National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (R01AI121144)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Infectious Diseases › Tuberculosis Research and Epidemiology
  • Social Sciences › Development › Poverty, Education, and Child Welfare
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Healthcare Systems and Reforms
Keywords
tuberculosis, cash transfers, tuberculosis diagnosis, TB treatment initiation, financial barriers, unconditional cash transfers, socioeconomic barriers, health care financing, Uganda

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review