4.5 Article

Prevalence of tuberculous infection and incidence of tuberculosis; a re-assessment of the Styblo rule

期刊

出版社

WORLD HEALTH ORGANIZATION
DOI: 10.2471/BLT.06.037804

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective To evaluate the validity of the fixed mathematical relationship between the annual risk of tuberculous infection (ARTI), the prevalence of smear-positive tuberculosis (TB) and the incidence of smear-positive TB specified as the Styblo rule, which TB control programmes use to estimate the incidence of TB disease at a population level and the case detection rate. Methods Population-based tuberculin surveys and surveys on prevalence of smear-positive TB since 1975 were identified through a literature search. For these surveys, the ratio between the number of tuberculous infections (based on ARTI estimates) and the number of smear-positive TB cases was calculated and compared to the ratio of 8 to 12 tuberculous infections per prevalent smear-positive TB case as part of the Styblo rule. Findings Three countries had national population-based data on both ARTI and prevalence of smear-positive TB for more than one point in time. In China the ratio ranged from 3.4 to 5.8, in the Philippines from 2.6 to 4.4, and in the Republic of Korea, from 3.2 to 4.7. All ratios were markedly lower than the ratio that is part of the Styblo rule. Conclusion According to recent country data, there are typically fewer than 8 to 12 tuberculous infections per prevalent smear-positive TB case, and it remains unclear whether this ratio varies significantly among countries. The decrease in the ratio compared to the Styblo rule probably relates to improvements in the prompt treatment of TB disease (by national TB programmes). A change in the number of tuberculous infections per prevalent smear-positive TB case in population-based surveys makes the assumed fixed mathematical relationship between ARTI and incidence of smear-positive TB no longer valid.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据