Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 1,018

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 17 of the 17 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

A systematic review of delay in the diagnosis and treatment of tuberculosis

Open access
Storla, Dag Gundersen, Yimer, Solomon, Bjune, Gunnar Aksel·2008·BMC Public Health

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Early diagnosis and immediate initiation of treatment are essential for an effective tuberculosis (TB) control program. Delay in diagnosis is significant to both disease prognosis at the individual level and transmission within the community. Most transmissions occur between the onset of cough and initiation of treatment. METHODS: A systematic review of 58 studies addressing delay in diagnosis and treatment of TB was performed. We found different definitions of, for example, debut of symptoms, first appropriate health care provider, time to diagnosis, and start of treatment. Rather than excluding studies that failed to meet strict scientific criteria (like in a meta-analysis), we tried to extract the "solid findings" from all of them to arrive on a more global understanding of diagnostic delay in TB. RESULTS: The main factors associated with diagnostic delay included human immunodeficiency virus; coexistence of chronic cough and/or other lung diseases; negative sputum smear; extrapulmonary TB; rural residence; low access (geographical or sociopsychological barriers); initial visitation of a government low-level healthcare facility, private practitioner, or traditional healer; old age; poverty; female sex; alcoholism and substance abuse; history of immigration; low educational level; low awareness of TB; incomprehensive beliefs; self-treatment; and stigma. CONCLUSION: The core problem in delay of diagnosis and treatment seemed to be a vicious cycle of repeated visits at the same healthcare level, resulting in nonspecific antibiotic treatment and failure to access specialized TB services. Once generation of a specific diagnosis was in reach, TB treatment was initiated within a reasonable period of time.

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 · 10.1186/1471-2458-8-15

Cites

17 of 17 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

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

Show all 17 references

Cited by

See all 1,018

Metadata

Authors
Storla, D. G., Yimer, S., & Bjune, G. A.
Venue
BMC Public Health
Published
2008-01-14
Volume
8
Issue
1
Pages
15-15
ISSN
1471-2458 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2042680533
Cited by
1,018
References
17
FWCI
3.86
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
gold

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: A systematic review of delay in the diagnosis and treatment of tuberculosis. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1186/1471-2458-8-15
The paper
Storla, D. G., Yimer, S., & Bjune, G. A. (2008). A systematic review of delay in the diagnosis and treatment of tuberculosis. BMC Public Health. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2458-8-15

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.