Research Questions and Priorities for Pediatric Tuberculosis: A Survey of Published Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses
Table 2
The focus of pediatric tuberculosis systematic reviews.
Category and subcategory
Pediatric TB research focus
Proportion (%)
Aetiology: 4 of (13.34%)
Factors relating to the physical environment
Environmental or external factors associated with the cause, risk, or development of TB disease in children
3/4 (75)
Surveillance and distribution
Mortality in children diagnosed with tuberculosis
1/4 (25)
Prevention of disease and conditions and promotion of well-being: 4 of (13.34%)
Primary prevention interventions to modify behaviors or promote well-being
Chemoprophylaxis of TB in children
3/4 (75)
Interventions to alter physical and biological environmental risks
Barriers to the implementation of isoniazid preventive therapy for tuberculosis in children
1/4 (25)
Detection, screening, and diagnosis: 13 of (43.33%)
Discovery and preclinical testing of markers and technologies
Xpert MTB/RIF for diagnosis of TB in children
8/13 (61.5)
Evaluation of markers and technologies
Stool for the diagnosis of TB in children
2/13 (15.4)
Influences and impact
Indeterminate interferon-gamma release assay for the diagnosis of tuberculosis in children
1/13 (7.7)
Population screening
TB screening
2/13 (15.4)
Development of treatments and therapeutic interventions: 01 of (3.33%)
Pharmaceuticals
Delamanid and bedaquiline to treat multidrug-resistant and extensively drug-resistant tuberculosis in children
1/1 (100)
Evaluation of treatments and therapeutic interventions: 7 of (23.33%)
Pharmaceuticals
Improve adherence to treatment for pediatric tuberculosis
2/7 (28.5)
Physical
Treatment outcome of TB in children
2/7 (28.5)
Complementary
Childhood tuberculosis treatment outcome and its association with HIV
3/7 (43)
Management of diseases and conditions: 1 of (3.33%)
Management and decision-making
Hospital management of TB in children
1/1 (100)
Denominator represents the total number of research focuses identified by all the included reviews. In this case, is greater than the 29 number of included systematic reviews because some reviews had a research focus captured by more than one category. There was no SR on “Underpinning research” and “Health and social care services research”.
