Skip to main content
PLOS One logoLink to PLOS One
. 2025 Jul 3;20(7):e0326324. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0326324

Breaking barriers for TB elimination: A novel community-led strategy revolutionizing tuberculosis case finding and treatment support in Senapati District Manipur-A quasi-experimental pre-post study protocol

Arangba S 1, Singh S 2, Nagarajan K 1, Malaisamy M 1, Watson B 1, Muanching L 3, Mattoo SK 4, Elangbam V 5, Singh WS 3, Ngade D 1, Ngaopuo A 1, Lungnalii KT 1, Serto T 3, Pfoze P 6, Nair D 1, Vignes Anand S 1, Elizabeth RK 7, Mark PS 8, Hanah RN 9, Yonuo P 8, Percy S 6, Padma Priyadarshini C 1, Kaur H 2,*
Editor: Zewdu Gashu Dememew10
PMCID: PMC12225811  PMID: 40608799

Abstract

Introduction

Despite being the world’s highest tuberculosis (TB) burden country, India still misses millions of TB cases annually. To address this issue, the India National Strategic Plan, following WHO strategy, promotes combining active case finding (ACF) with passive case finding (PCF) activities. National TB Elimination Programme (NTEP) began ACF campaigns thrice a year, targeting vulnerable populations. However, states like Manipur faced challenges in implementing and sustaining ACF activities due to resource constraints.

Objective

To assess the impact of engaging student and women organizations (SAWOs) in improving TB case notifications, treatment adherence, and completion rate in NTEP, as well as to estimate the cost-effectiveness of the ACF intervention.

Method

A quasi-experimental pre-post study is being conducted among individuals ≥15 years residing in Senapati District, Manipur, having two phases: preparatory and enhanced case finding and implementation of the ACF. Data is being collected and compared on TB case notification, treatment adherence, and outcomes beforeand after the intervention. Chi-square test will be used to test the statistical significance and logistic regression to identify the factors independently associated with the impact of intervention. Potential confounders at both patient and facility levels will be identified based on expert opinion and bivariate analysis. A multi-level logistic regression model will be used to control the confounding, with sensitivity analysis to ensure result robustness.Cost analysis will cover direct, indirect, medical, and non-medical costs for patients and health system. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratio per quality-adjusted life years gained will be evaluated.

Discussion

This study introduces a novel community-led model involving SAWOsto improve TB case detection and treatment support, comprehensively addressing allfour pillars of ‘END TB’ strategy. The intervention is a community-based participatory research, emphasizing collaboration between researchers andcommunity to address TB control. The main activities of this intervention include community TB sensitization, ECF, ACF, treatment support and monitoring. This model could significantly impact TB control efforts, especially in resource-constrained settings like Manipur, offering valuable insights into ACF implementation and its economic implications.

Introduction

Tuberculosis (TB) remains a significant global health challenge, causing substantial mortality and morbidity worldwide. In 2021, an estimated 10.6 million people were affected globally,resulting in 1.4 million deaths [1]. India alone accounted for 28% of the global TB burden, with 36% of TB-related deaths occurring among HIV-negative individuals [1]. Despite advances in TB diagnosis and treatment, a staggering 2.9 million TB cases were missing globally, including 17% from India, either undetected or unreported to National TB Elimination Program (NTEP) [2].

A significant factor contributing to the underreporting of TB casesin India is the overreliance onpassive case finding (PCF) strategies under the NTEP [3,4]. With PCF,the diagnosis of TB depends largelyon individuals seeking healthcare when they exhibit symptoms suggestive of TB [5]. According to the India National TB Prevalence Survey 2019–2021, 64% of TB-symptomatic individuals did not seek healthcare services [5] highlighting the urgent need for a comprehensive approach, that includes provider-initiated systematic screening for early diagnosis and treatment [68].

The WHO ‘End TB Strategy’ emphasizes systematic screening to identify the missing TB cases [9,10]. Aligned with this strategy,the Indian National Strategic Plan (NSP) 2017–2025 advocates for a combined approach of active case finding (ACF) alongside PCF to address the missing TB cases. Since 2017, the NTEPhas conductedACF activities in a campaign mode for two-week intervals thrice a yeartargeting vulnerable populations [11,12]. However, several states and districts, including Manipur, encountered challenges in both implementing and sustaining these activities due toresource constraints [1315]. The challenges in both executing and maintaining ACF initiatives underscore the need for innovative intervention strategies to effectively implement and sustain these efforts in India, a country burdened by high TB prevalence [16,17].

To address these challenges in implementing ACF, previous studies have often utilized Community Healthcare Workers (CHWs) and Accredited Social Health Activists (ASHA) workers, demonstrating theirefficacy and cost-effectiveness [1821]. Nevertheless, maintaining these efforts over time, particularly in India, has posed significant challenges [22,23]. CHWs/ASHA workers grapple with managing multiple health responsibilities, making it challenging to meet specific health program targets due to workload pressure [24]. Moreover, their uneven distribution across villages, coupled with language barriers and community acceptance issues, further complicates effective implementation [25,26]. Previous studies have also explored involving students in TB awareness and advocacy efforts, demonstrating successful engagement of elementary, secondary and National Service Scheme (NSS) students in case finding and treatment support [2735]. However, to our knowledge,there remains a notable gap in engaging organized student and women organizations at the grassroots/village level for TB case finding and monitoring treatment adherence [36,37]. Student and women organizationsare those organizations formed by individuals with defined roles and responsibilities to represent youth and women from their respective village, community, and district level to represent at a larger forum with similar goals and objectives to promote or celebrate a common interest. They work for the welfare of the society. They play a pivotal role in fostering community development, advocating for social justice, and addressing pressing societal issues. Their dynamic and multifaceted contributions stem from their ability to mobilize grassroots efforts, empower marginalized groups, and promote sustainable change. The organizations function as a youth and women wing in their respective villages, communities, and at the district level.

There is a wide spread of student and women organizations in India, especially in North-Eastern India, functioning with different names, with common goals and objectives. The student organization members include all the youths in their respective villages, irrespective of gender and profession, and the women organization members include all married women irrespective of professions. Both the organization leaders called executive staff were elected to the most influential person among their members in the village, community, and at the district level. Recognizing their potential, our study aims to involve SAWOs in Senapati district, Manipur to support NTEP in carrying out ACFactivities and help in monitoring TB patients from the identification of symptoms to treatment completion. This study seeks to demonstrate the effective implementation and sustaining of ACF activities in the challenging geographical context of Manipur state. In addition, we will also assess the cost-effectiveness of this intervention to provide evidence for scalable community-based TB control strategies in resource-constrained settings.

Methodology

Study design

A quasi-experimental pre-post study is conducted across theSenapati District inManipurto assess the impact of engaging SAWOsinimproving TB case notifications, treatment adherence and completion rates as compared to existing routine strategies underthe NTEP. Additionally, the study also aims to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of the SAWOs-led ACF interventions by estimating the cost per TB case diagnosed and treated through ACF.

Study period

The actual study period is 18 months. However, the study period has been extended by another 6 months due to disruptions of activities in between the project period due to unexpected ethnic violence that erupted in Manipur, India on 3rd May 2023. The study was initiated on 27th March 2023 and is expected to be complete on 19th May 2025.

Study implementers

The study is collaboratively conducted by the Indian Council of Medical Research-National Institute for Research in Tuberculosis (ICMR-NIRT), Chennai, ICMR Head Quarter,NewDelhi, Central TB Division (CTD), New Delhi,National TB Elimination Programme (NTEP), Manipur, National Health Mission (NHM) Senapati,Manipur,Senapati District Student Association (SDSA), Senapati District Women Association (SDWA), Regional Institute of Medical Sciences (RIMS) Imphal, Manipur and Directorate of Health Services (DHS), Senapati, Manipur.

Study setting

Senapati district, situated in the northern part of Manipur, is characterizedby its hilly terrain. According to the 2011 census, the district comprises six sub-divisions, 686 villages, and a population of 479,148. The majority of the population (98.44%) resides in rural areas, with Scheduled Tribes (ST) accounting for 87.5% of the total [24]. There are no urban areas in the district except one census town. In 2016, the Government of Manipur divided the Senapati district into twodistricts, resulting in 7 sub-divisions [25,26]. As per the NTEP Senapati report, currently the district has 189 villages, 47,411 households, and a population of 285,404, with STs making up 92.74% of the population. It is the only district in Manipur where a Particularly Vulnerable Tribal Group (PVTG)resides. The district is predominantly inhabited byMaram, Mao, Poumai, Zelianrong, and Thangal tribes, each with distinct languages. Despite Manipuri being the official state language,many villagers do not speak or understand it. The villages are sparsely populated, located in mountainous regions, with limited all-weather road connectivity, posing logistical challenges, especially during the monsoonseason from June to September. According to the OKDISCD (Omeo Kumar Das Institute of Social Change and Development) household survey report, only 47% of the villages have all-weather road connectivity [38].

Health infrastructure

As per the district NTEP report, there are one District TB centre(DTC), oneTuberculosis Unit (TUs),fourDesignated Microscopy Centres (DMCs) and elevenPrimary Health Institutions(PHIs). There are no private hospitals in the district. In Senapati district, there are one CBNAAT Machine, twoTruenatMachines, one FM microscope, and four ZN microscopes.

TB burden status in the study district

The exact burden of TB in Manipur, particularly in the Senapati district, is yet to be precisely estimated due to the lack of prevalence studies. However, in a similar settingneighbouring district (Ukhrul district) in Manipurwhere over 70% of the population is tribal,reported a TB prevalence of 274/100,000, which increased to 358/100,000 after adjusting for Chest X-ray [39]. Another study using NFHS-4 data reported a prevalence of 710/100,000 in Manipur [40]. A modelling study also suggests a high TB infection rate in Manipur as compared to other states [41].

As per the NTEP report, TB notifications by PCF for the Senapati district were 162, 137, 145, and 190 cases in 2019, 2020, 2021, and 2022, respectively. However, the actual burden of TB in Manipur, especially in the Senapati district, is yet to be explored, and as no ACF activities have been conducted in the district or the state, as per the India TB report, thus these figures may not fully reflect the true burden [13,14].

Exposure to TB risk factors in the study district

Various risk factors for TB are prevalent in Senapati District. The OKDISCD household survey reported that 35% of the Senapati district population lives below the poverty line, significantly higher than the state average of 22% for rural areas. Additionally, over 99% of households use solid fuels(wood, coal, kerosene oil, hay/leaves, and agricultural waste) for cooking which contributes to indoor air pollution and respiratory health risks [24]. According to NFHS-5, 46% of women and 64% of men aged ≥15 years in the Senapati district use tobacco in some form, further complicating TB control efforts [42]. The district also faces an HIVprevalence of 0.45%, according to thedistrict-level estimates from the National AIDS Control Organisation (NACO), which increases susceptibility to TB infection and worsens treatment outcomes [43].

Strategic approach

Given the highprevalence of TB,coupled with challenging terrain, inadequate health infrastructure, the infection rate in the state and the absence of ACF efforts at state and district levels, our strategy is to engage locally recruited SAWOs at the village level to enhance TB case detection and ensure treatment support until completion.

Study population

Individuals≥15 years of age residing in the Senapati District of Manipur for at least a minimum of one month or more are included in our study. The exclusion criteria included mobile population/visitors, institutional populations, i.e., prisons, defense establishments, hospitals, nursing homes, hostels (except schools, colleges and offices),and areas where survey operations are considered not to be feasible like insecurity areas.

Study phase and procedures

The study is conducted in two phases. The first phase ispreparatory and TB-Enhance Case Finding (TB-ECF)phase. The second phase is theimplementation of ACF, which serves as the intervention phase(Fig 1). The activities in eachphaseare detailed as follows:

Fig 1. Flow diagram of study phases and procedures. The study is being conducted in two phases. (A) Preparatory and TB-Enhanced Case Finding (TB-ECF) phase, which included: rapport building and volunteer recruitment, volunteer training, TB knowledge, attitude, and practice (KAP) assessment, awareness campaigns, village mapping and household enumeration, and baseline data collection on TB notification, treatment adherence, and outcomes. (B) Active Case Finding (ACF) intervention phasecomprising two rounds of door-to-door verbal TB symptom screening, sputum sample collection from symptomatic individuals, sample transportation, patient follow-up, treatment adherence support, and endline data collection.

Fig 1

  • I. Preparatory and TB-ECF Phase

The preparatory and TB-ECFphase is currently ongoing. During this phase, the following seven activitiesare conducted: (1) building rapport and volunteers recruitment, (2) providing training to the volunteers, (3) assessing TB Knowledge, attitude, and practice (TB-KAP), (4) conducting a TB awareness campaign, (5) village mapping, (6) household enumeration and (7) performing TB-ECF.

  • 1. Building rapport and volunteer recruitment

During this phase, the study teams explore the study areas and engage with SAWOs leaders at the district, tribal as well asvillage levels to establish rapport. The study team requests the SAWOs leaders to nominate one volunteer per 150 households from all the villages of the district. After obtaining a list of volunteers from SAWOs leaders, the study team screensthe volunteersfor eligibility, based on the specific criteria:(1) age 18 years and above,(2) member of localSAWOs, (3) fluent in the local languageand literate (able to read and write),(4) willing to undergo a 2-days training by the study team, (5) committed to staying in their area/village for at least one year,(6) able to provide written informed consent and (7) not currently diagnosed with active TB at the time of enrolment/consenting to become a volunteer. Eligible volunteers gave written consent, receiveddetailed study information,underwentscreening for TB symptoms, and had a chest X-ray to confirm their TB status before enrollment.

  • 2. Training Volunteers

Eligible volunteers undergo 2 days of hands-on training. The training is provided by the TB research experts team (study team) including medical officers, public health experts, sociologists, social workers, statisticians, healtheconomists,and laboratory experts. All the training is conductedusing our specially designed training manual for this study. The training package includes (1) basic knowledge of TB (causes, symptoms, transmission, prevention, diagnosis, treatment aspects of TB, NTEP/DOTS strategy, risk factor, cough etiquette) (2) identification of presumptive TB cases (3) sputum collection and transportations (4) importance of monitoring during the treatment (5) importance of follow-up (6) basic counseling principles (7) data collection tools (8) thorough understanding of the study protocol.

  • 3. Asses TB-KAP

The study team (trainers) assesses the TB-KAP before and after completing the training to ensure that the volunteers have adequate knowledge about the TB before starting the screening process at the field level. Additional training is provided for another day to those volunteers who underperform on the TB-KAP test.

  • 4. ConductTB awareness campaign

TB awareness campaignsare conducted to educate and sensitize the community about TB, reduce fear and stigma about TB, and also to inform the community that door-to-door ACF activities will take place. This exercise will help us gain more cooperation and trust from the community. Weplan to carry out forty TB awareness campaignsacross the district by merging/combining nearby villages after consulting with the village leaders and volunteers. The awareness campaign includes lectures in public gatherings with Information, Education, and Communication (IEC) activities. The study team, along with the volunteers and medical officers and their staff from all the community/primary health centers/institutions in the district, carry out the TB awareness campaigns.

  • 5. Village mapping

Village mapping is done for all the villages in the district to establish distinct boundaries for each village and to establish designated ACF areas for volunteers. The trained volunteers carry out this activity to pinpoint the location of all households within their designated area to ensure that no individuals or households are overlooked during screenings and to avoid repeated or duplicate screenings. Furthermore, this exercise helps the volunteers to efficiently navigate the households and identify optimal access routes for planned visits.

  • 6. Household enumeration

Household enumerationis carried out to estimate approximate baseline study populations for the upcoming interventions to ensure no individuals are overlooked during the rounds of screenings and also to avoid repeated or duplicate screenings. A trained volunteer visits door-to-door and linelists all the eligible participants and assignsUnique Individual Identification Numbers (UIIN) to each individual in their designated areas. TheUIIN is generated using REDCap software (electronic data capture tools). The software is installed on the volunteer’s mobile device during the training session. The volunteers conduct individual interviewswith all the family members aged 15 years and above. For those individuals who are not there at the time of the first visit, two more attempts are made for the interview. After three attempts during the enumeration period and not being able to capture the data, another attempt is made during the first and second rounds of screening. The volunteerscollect socio-demographic details and information on common health problems faced by the individual in the last 5 years.

  • 7. TB-ECF

We plan to do ECF during the preparatory phase to avoid delaying the diagnosis and treatment ofpeople with TB. We expect that some people who have TB symptoms may approach the research team/volunteers for consultation after receiving education and awareness about TB during the TB awareness campaign. For those who approach the research team/volunteers with TB symptoms during the preparatory phase, they areverbally screened for TB symptoms and referred to the nearest communityhealth center/primary healthinstitution/ primayhealthcentre/district TB center (CHC/PHI/PHC/DTC) with a referral slip (Annexure-I in S1 File) for further diagnosis and treatment.

  • II. ACF Intervention phase

This phase includes two rounds of screening. The total duration for both rounds of screening is twelve months, with each round lasting six months. The trained volunteers carry out door-to-door screening, individually assessing all the family membersaged >15 years for TB symptoms using specific screening tools tailored for each round. The first round screening tool consists of information related tosocio-demographic details, TB symptoms, TB knowledge, TB history, the Individual’shabits oftaking tobacco and alcohol, and health-seeking behavior of people who have TB symptoms(Annexure-IV in S1 File). The second round screening tool consistsof information on TB symptoms and the Individual’s habits of taking tobacco and alcohol (Annexure-V in S1 File). If any of the family members are not present during the first visit, two more attemptsare made at different times and days after consulting with the family members/neighbours who are present during the visit. Efforts are made to obtain the absentee’s mobilecontact details and set an appointmentby phone based on their availability before attempting anothervisit. We aimto complete each round of active door-to-door TB symptom screening within the first month of starting the screening because the volunteers are present in almost all the villages, with each volunteer responsible for only 150 households. After completing each round of active door-to-door screening, volunteers stop visiting households for screening. However, unscheduled screening continuesas long as the volunteersareactive,and even after completing the project period, the active volunteers will continue to do the activities. Unscheduled screenings, we define as unplanned screenings where the community people (people who have TB symptoms) approach the volunteers to be screened for TB symptoms anytime post-completion of the active door-to-door screening. Post-completion of the project period, we proposed to continue the volunteer activities/service with the support of NTEP, NHM and DHS. The NTEP, NHM, and DHS will continue to monitor the activities of the volunteers.

In the first round, the volunteersscreened for the following TB symptomsusinground one screening tool which include TB symptoms like(1) Persistent cough for ≥2 weeks (2) Fever for ≥2 weeks (3) Loss of appetite (4) Night sweats for >2 weeks or unintentional weight loss (loss of 4.5 kg or >5 kg of the usual body weight over a period of 6–12 months) (5) Presence of blood in sputum any time during the last 6 months (6) Chest pain in last one month. When the volunteers identify any individual with TB symptoms, along with cough or only cough, two sputums, preferably mucopurulent,are collected in a sterile falcon tube, one on the spot and another the next day early morning. The volunteersdo not collect sputum from individuals without cough symptoms even if they have other TB symptoms,as they are unlikely to produce quality sputum. Such individuals are referred to the nearest health facilities for further investigation (Fig 2). Sputum is collected in an open well-ventilatedspace away from the crowded areas. Individuals with TB symptoms are given a sputum container with personal details written on its side (Name, age, gender, village name, type of sputum and volunteer name). The on-spot sputum is designated as ‘S’ and the next day’s early morning sample as ‘M’. All sputum is transported to the nearest PHIs/ PHCs/CHCs/DTC on the same day in a cold chain, following the NTEP guidelines (cool chain within 72 hours) by the trained volunteers. From the PHIs/ PHCs/CHCs, the project staff/ PHIs/PHCs/CHCs staff collect the samples on the same day and transport them to the DTC for investigations. All sputumsamples are tested usingCBNAAT. The individuals with TB symptoms whose two consecutive sputum (on-spot and early morning sputum) results are reported to be negative, but still have the TB symptoms are referred to the nearest chestX-ray centre for further investigations (Fig 2).

Fig 2. TB screening and diagnostic algorithm.

Fig 2

Individuals aged >15 years were verbally screened by trained volunteers and categorized as symptomatic or asymptomatic. (A) Symptomatic individuals with or without cough: with cough underwent for CBNAAT testing. CBNAAT-positive cases were initiated on treatment as per NTEP guidelines. CBNAAT-negative individuals were referred for chest X-ray and without cough were referred for further investigation. (B) Asymptomatic individuals were not investigated further. Abbreviations: CBNAAT, Cartridge-Based Nucleic Acid Amplification Test; NTEP, National TB Elimination Programme.

Once a confirmed TB case has been identified, the trained project staff informs/forwards the test result to the volunteer over the phone to inform the test result to the patient. The volunteers visit the patient’s house to inform the patient of the test result from whom the sputum is collected. Also, with the consent of the patients, the volunteers inform the test result to the other family members who are residing in the same household. Subsequently, the volunteers encourage the family members to support the patient during their treatment and also encourage and counsel the Household contacts of pulmonary TB patients to go for further investigations and evaluationsat the nearest CHC/PHI/PHC/DTC to rule out active TB to start the TB Preventive Treatment(TPT) as per the NTEP guideline. All diagnosed TB patients are linked with the NTEP and treated as per the NTEP program.

All TB patients who are undergoing treatment, including the patient who has been identified through the routine program strategies,receivepsycho-social and adherence support from volunteers to complete their treatment. For non-adhering patients, volunteers help counsel them to complete the treatment by taking the prescribed medication on time. Any adverse events during treatment are reported by the volunteers to the district TB program officials. Throughout the journey of TB case identification and treatment, the volunteers act as liaisons between the health system and the community.

The second roundof screening is repeated after six months from the date of starting the first round of screening using the second-round screening tool. All the activities are repeated similar to the first round of screening.

Comparator arm

Our comparator arm is the existing routine NTEP program of Senapati district, Manipur. The baseline comparison years of the study are 2019, 2020, 2021, and 2022, that is,before, during, and post-COVID-19 on the TB case notification rate, adherence rate, and treatment outcomes. As per the routine NTEP program data, the following Table 1is the rate of TB notification, adherence and treatment outcome for the year 2019–2022.

Table 1. 2019–2022 TB notification, adherence and treatment outcome.

Indicator 2019 2020 2021 2022
Notification
Notification (Achievementvs NTEP Target) 162/240 (68%) 137/190 (72%) 145/190 (76%) 190/155 (123%)
Adherence
Adherence rate 76% 87% 99% 95%
Treatment outcome
Treatment Success rate 140
(147 cases in current facility) (95%)
116
(123 cases in current facility) (94%)
121
(132 cases in current facility) (91.6%)
169
(173 cases in current facility) (97.6%)
Loss-to-follow-up 0 1 (0.8%) 1 (0.7%) 1 (0.5%)
Regimen changed 4 (2.7%) 2 (1.6%) 5 (3.7%) 0
Death 3 (2%) 3 (2.4%) 4 (3.0%) 1 (0.5%)
Not evaluated 0 1(0.8%) 1(0.7%) 0
Wrongly diagnosed 0 0 0 1 (0.5%)

Source: NTEP Senapati register & NIKSHAY portal.

Note: Cure and treatment completed are counted as treatment success.

Note: Cases in the current facility are the total number of TB patients initiated on treatment.

Study population coverage and notification consideration

The year 2019 isconsidered as the reference period before the effect of COVID-19 on TB notification. In 2019, the annual target for TB notification was162,and 68% of the expected target was achieved. Similarly, 2021 is considered as the comparison period considering the effect of COVID-19. In 2021, the annual target for TB notification is145,and 76% of the expected target is achievedin the Senapati district. With this intervention, we aim to achieve at least80% of the target notification.

With the intervention, we aim to reach a TB notification rate of at least 130 per 100000 population. To detect this notification rate with a relative precision of 5% and alpha of 5%, the required sample size is about 39045. However, our study covers the entire population ≥15 years in the district.

Study recruitment/project status

Volunteers recruitment and training was started on 27th March 2023 and is ongoing to replace the drop-out volunteers. The first round of verbal TB symptoms screening at the community was started on 26th September 2023, and is ongoing, and the second round of screening was started on 1st April 2024, and is ongoing.

Outcome

The study primary outcomeswill be the TB case notification rate, adherence rate, and treatment outcome. TB case notification rate is determined by the total number of TB cases notified in the district before and after the interventions. The treatment adherence rate is determined by the percentage of TB patients adhering to the treatment before and after the interventions. Treatment outcome is assessed bythe total number of patients cured, treatment completed, treatment failed, died, lost-to-follow-up, not evaluated, and treatment success before and after the interventions. All outcome indicators are measured according to the NTEP program definitions. Our study secondary outcomesinclude the direct and indirect costs per TB case notified, treatment success and quality adjusted life years (QALYs) gained.

Data collection

Tool used for data collection.

All the data is collected and managed using REDCap electronic data capture tools hosted at ICMR-NIRT. REDCap is a secure, web-based application designed to support data capture for research studies.

TB KAP information.

TB KAP data is collected by the study team from the volunteers before and after the training, after obtaining written informed consent to become a volunteer. TB KAP data consist of socio-demographic details, TB knowledge, Attitude, and practice-related questions (Annexure-II in S1 File).

Household enumeration information.

The household enumeration data is collected by trained volunteers from eligible community individuals. The data will consist of socio-demographic details and the common health problems faced by the individual in the last 5 years (Annexure-III in S1 File).

First and second rounds of screening information.

First and second roundsof screening data are collected by trained volunteers from the eligible community individuals who have been enrolled duringthe household enumeration. The first round data consists of socio-demographic details, TB knowledge, TB history,Individual’s habits of taking tobacco and alcohol, TB symptoms, and health-seeking behaviour of people who have TB symptoms (Annexure-IV in S1 File). The second round of intervention data consists of only TB symptoms and the Individual’s habits of taking tobacco and alcohol (Annexure-V in S1 File).

Laboratory sample and test result information.

Details of sputum samples received from the volunteers and sputum test results data are collected daily from the DTC lab technician/medical officer by the trained project staff. The project staff conveys the test result to the concernedvolunteers on the same day for further conveying it to the concerned studyparticipant.

Baseline and endline information.

The baseline and endline data on TB case notification, adherence, and treatment outcomes are collected by the trained project staff during the preparatoryphase and end of the intervention from the DTC through the Nikshay portal and TB program registersbefore starting the intervention and after completing the intervention. Data discrepancies in the Nikshay portal and program registersarecompared and corrected accordingly along with the study team, NTEP program officials and WHO consultants.

Cost information

Cost data is collected from both the health system and patient perspective. Trained field investigators conduct two rounds of data collection at participants’ residences: first, during the intensive phase (initial two months of treatment) and againupon completion of treatment. Data collection is conducted using a structured, pre-coded interview schedule. (Annexure -VI & VII in S1 File).

Health system costs.

A health system perspective for economic evaluation considers only the recurring costs incurred by the health system, such as the cost ofprogram administration, human resources (staff salary), training, and implementation, honorarium for volunteers, monitoring, and supervision. In addition,information on laboratory consumables, stationeries, IEC documents, communication, review meetings, transport, and other costs is also collected from the intervention implementers and the existing TB program.

Patient cost.

Patient cost is the out-of-pocket expenditure incurred by the individual who accesses treatment services for TB. This cost includesboth direct and indirect costs. Direct cost includes both medical and non-medical costs. Direct medical costs include doctors’ consultation fees, money spent on investigations (X-ray, sputum examination) and drugs. Direct non-medical cost includes money spent on transportation and food. Indirect cost includesself-reportedworkabsenteeism and loss of wagesbecause of the TB illness for both the patient and their accompanying persons during treatment.

Socio-economic status.

Information is also collected to measure the economic status of the participants through income, standard of living index (housing details and essentials) and wealth index (durables at home).

Data quality assurance and confidentiality

To ensure data quality assurance, the study team ensures clarity of the study protocol and its procedures for all the project staff and volunteers during the training period, apart from the training package. A bi-monthly follow-up and monitoring visits are carried out by the study team along with the SAWO leaders to make sure that the work is done accurately and timely. During monitoring visits, we review consent forms, completeness of the data collection forms, and compliance with the study protocol. Any anomalies in the process are followed up by the field staff. The data is stored in secure servers at ICMR-NIRT. The REDCap system has built-in data validation and checks to ensure the consistency of the data. Also, regular quality control of the data is also done to ensure valid data collection.

Data analysis plan

The baseline demographic and socio-economic characteristics of the study population (age, gender, occupation, education, income) will besummarized using means and standard deviations for continuous variables; frequencies and percentages for categorical variables. The household data, including the number of households surveyed and the total number of eligible individuals, will be summarized. The distribution of the common health problems reported by the participants will be obtained. The mean scores of TB knowledge, attitude, and practice from the pre-and post-training for volunteers will be calculated. The preand posttraining scores will be compared and statistical significancewill be tested using paired t-test.

TB case notification rates during the pre-intervention and post-intervention periods will be determined. Treatment outcomes (cure rates, treatment completion, loss-to-follow-up, regimen change, failure, mortality) pre and post intervention will be analyzed. These indicators pre and post intervention will be compared and chi-square tests will be used to test the statistical significance.

The individual level patient data will be obtained from the Nikshay portal. The potential confounders from the patient level and facility level data based on contextual factors such as facility size, patient volume, or baseline performance will be identified based on expert opinion and bivariate analysis. To control for confounding, we will include the confounders in the multi-level logistic regression model. Sensitivity analyses will also be conducted to assess the robustness of our findings. Logistic regression will be used to identifythe factors independently associated with the impact of the intervention.

Cost analysis, we will measure the total and average direct and indirect medical and non-medical costs incurred before (for diagnosis) and during treatment (for treatment) bythe patients. We will also measure the total and average cost incurred by the health system to treat a patient. The effectiveness is measured in terms of the number of TB cases detected and treated. Additionally, we will consider the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) per QALY gained by the intervention. The ICER will be calculated by dividing the difference in total costs between the intervention and comparator to determine whether the intervention is less-cost more-effective or more-cost less-effective.

Ethical consideration

The institution ethics committee (ICMR-NIRT & RIMS) approved(No:234/NIRT-IEC/2022&No:A/206/REB/Prop(FP)186/114/25/2022) the study. The institution’s ethics committee approves the participant information sheet and assent/consent form, which is used to obtain assent/consent from the study participants. Written or thumb impression consent/assent is obtainedonly from participants exhibiting TB symptoms during door-to-door screening. Oral consent/assent is obtained from other populations without TB symptoms. Participant information sheets are provided before obtaining consent/assent, and for those unable to read/understand, study volunteers will help in explaining the study details in the local language. Consent/assent is obtained after providing detailed information about the study.

For volunteers, written informed consent to become a volunteeris taken after meeting all the eligibility criteria to become a volunteer, before providing them with the training. An honorarium of ₹500 per month and a mobile recharge of ₹700 per quarter are given to the volunteers from the project for the service they render for the study. Apart from this, the volunteers are eligible to receive schemes provided by the NTEP program under the Government of India,including the informant incentive (₹500/- given on diagnosis of TB among referrals from the community to public sector health facility) and patient support incentive(₹1000 for drug-sensitive TB patients and ₹5000 for MDR-TB).

Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) Kits (face shield, glove, mask (N95), and hand sanitizer) were provided to the volunteers to be used during screening or household visits for counseling the TB patients. Also kits like vaccine carrier box, ice pack, falcon tube, parafilm M roll, tissue paper, sellotape, cotton, durable marker, and ziplock cover were provided to the volunteers for collecting and transporting the sputum samples. All the kits were handed over to the volunteers after completing arigorous two-dayhands-on training.

Discussion

This study protocol introduces a novel community-led strategy aimed at enhancing TB case finding and treatment support. The primary objective of the study is to evaluatethe impact of engaging SAWOs inimproving TB case notifications, treatment adherence and completion rates as compared to existing routineNTEPstrategies. Additionally, the study aims to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of the SAWOs-led ACF interventionand address challenges encountered by the NTEP in India, particularly in the state of Manipur,regarding the implementation and sustainability of ACF activities. By engaging local SAWOs at the grassroot level, thestudy aims to enhance TB case detection efforts and ensure continuous treatment support until completion.

Aligned with India’s National Strategic Plan, this project comprehensively addresses allfour pillars of TB control such as Detect, Treat, Prevent and Build. The study focuses on door-to-door screening to identifypresumptive TB cases and connect them to the health system for early diagnosis (Detect), early initiation of treatment for all the diagnosed TB patients (Treat), community education to dispel the misconception and stigma attached with the disease by conducting multiple TB awareness campaigns at the community level to break the chain of transmissions (Prevent), and community involvement in the decision-making process, involvement in program implementation, monitoring and evaluation (Build).

The outcomes of this study have the potential to significantly influence TB control efforts in India, especially in resource-constrained settings like Manipur. By involving SAWOs, the study introduces a novel approach that could be more sustainable and effective in reaching underserved populations and hard-to-reach areas because these organizations have deep-rooted connections within the community, which can help overcome barriers related to demography, language, trust and access to healthcare services. Our study addresses the social and behavioral factors that influence disease transmission as well as treatment outcomes by involving community members as active participants in TB control activities. This approach in the current study may not only improve TB case detection and treatment outcomes but also help build local capacity for future health interventions. Thestudy also could provide valuable insights into the economic implications of implementing ACF strategies, which is essential for similar future planning and expanding TB control programs in high-burden, often resource-limited settings [44,45].

The engagement of SAWOs aligns with the community-based participatory research approach [4648] emphasizes collaboration between researchers and community members to address TB control. Theprojectsupports the global effort to ‘End TB’ [34] by providing sustainable, evidence-based solutions for TB control in countries with similar settings. The study results will inform and facilitate the nationwide expansion of an effective intervention tailored to the Indian context and align with the principles of the NTEP to identify undiagnosed cases and control TB.

The key strength of this study is thus its comprehensive approach, which includes multiple components such as community sensitization, active case finding, treatment support and monitoring in addressing all aspects of TB control, thereby aiming to achieve a more holistic impact on TB prevention and care. However, several challenges and limitations should be considered. The study’s success will rely on the active participation and commitment of the students and women’s organization leaders and their members, which may vary depending on the local context and leadership. Additionally, the study’s impact may be limited by the availability of resources and infrastructure in the study area.

Despite these challenges, this study represents an innovative modelfor TB control that could serve as a blueprint for other regions facing similar challenges. By leveraging existing community networks and resources, the study aims to improve TB case detection and treatment outcomes not only in Manipur but also potentially in other high-burden regions. Furthermore, continued research and evaluation will be essential to assess the long-term impact and scalability of this community-led approach.

Dissemination plans

The importance of the study as well as the learnings/findings of the study will be disseminated to all the key stakeholders, including the NationalTB program, State & District health Officials, and through peer-reviewed journal publications.

Supporting information

S1 File

Study tools and questionnaires used for data collection. Includes: Annexure I – Presumptive TB Case Referral Slip. Annexure II – TB Knowledge, Attitude, and Practice Questionnaire. Annexure III – Household Enumeration Questionnaire. Annexure IV – First Round TB Symptom Screening Tool. Annexure V – Second Round TB Symptom Screening Tool. Annexure VI – Part 1: Cost Identification Post-Treatment Initiation. Annexure VII – Parts 2 & 3: Cost Identification at End of Intensive Phase & End of Treatment.

(DOCX)

pone.0326324.s001.docx (526.1KB, docx)

Acknowledgments

We would like to thankthe Senapati District Student & Women Organizations (SAWOs) along with the federationunit leaders and their team for not only their valuable comments &suggestions while developing the study protocol to meet the local needs,but also for their continuous help & support in the implementation of the study and their commitment to end TB from the district. We would also like to express our deepest appreciationto the Directorate of Health Service Manipur, NTEP Manipur, the Senapati District Administrators, district health teams, all villages’ leaders, and the churches Pastors for their continuous help and support in implementing the study. We are deeply indebted to the project key stakeholders members from ICMR-NIRT, ICMR HQrs., the Central TB Division, WHO India Country Office and the external subject expert members of ICMR for their critical review and evaluation of the study proposal. We extend special thanks to Mr. A Saloni Tony, President of SDSA, for his active participation and for motivating the student federation units to engage tribal communities in the study. We are also thankful to all the study participants’, the project staff involved in the study (Research Scientists, field investigator, Lab Technicians, Data Entry Operators, senior project Assistant), including the Project Officer (Amit Solanki) for generous help in assisting & revising the manuscript and for all budget related processing. We are indebted to all well-wishers for the successful implementation of our project.

Data Availability

No datasets were generated or analysed during the current study. All relevant data from this study will be made available upon study completion. Deidentified research data will be made publicly available when the study is completed and published.

Funding Statement

This work is being supported by the Indian Council of Medical Research (ICMR) project funding grant number No. NER/82/2022-ECD-I, Proposal ID:2022-16180 to PI: Dr Stephen Arangba. The sponsors or funders had no role in the study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.

References

Decision Letter 0

Zewdu Dememew

Dear Dr. Kaur,

Thank you for submitting your manuscript to PLOS ONE. After careful consideration, we feel that it has merit but does not fully meet PLOS ONE’s publication criteria as it currently stands. Therefore, we invite you to submit a revised version of the manuscript that addresses the points raised during the review process.

Please submit your revised manuscript by Feb 06 2025 11:59PM. If you will need more time than this to complete your revisions, please reply to this message or contact the journal office at plosone@plos.org . When you're ready to submit your revision, log on to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/ and select the 'Submissions Needing Revision' folder to locate your manuscript file.

  • A rebuttal letter that responds to each point raised by the academic editor and reviewer(s). You should upload this letter as a separate file labeled 'Response to Reviewers'.

  • A marked-up copy of your manuscript that highlights changes made to the original version. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Revised Manuscript with Track Changes'.

  • An unmarked version of your revised paper without tracked changes. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Manuscript'.

If applicable, we recommend that you deposit your laboratory protocols in protocols.io to enhance the reproducibility of your results. Protocols.io assigns your protocol its own identifier (DOI) so that it can be cited independently in the future. For instructions see: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submission-guidelines#loc-laboratory-protocols . Additionally, PLOS ONE offers an option for publishing peer-reviewed Lab Protocol articles, which describe protocols hosted on protocols.io. Read more information on sharing protocols at https://plos.org/protocols?utm_medium=editorial-email&utm_source=authorletters&utm_campaign=protocols .

We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript.

Kind regards,

Zewdu Gashu Dememew, M.D

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Journal requirements:

When submitting your revision, we need you to address these additional requirements.

1. Please ensure that your manuscript meets PLOS ONE's style requirements, including those for file naming. The PLOS ONE style templates can be found at

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=wjVg/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_main_body.pdf and

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=ba62/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_title_authors_affiliations.pdf

2. We note that you have indicated that there are restrictions to data sharing for this study. For studies involving human research participant data or other sensitive data, we encourage authors to share de-identified or anonymized data. However, when data cannot be publicly shared for ethical reasons, we allow authors to make their data sets available upon request. For information on unacceptable data access restrictions, please see http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/data-availability#loc-unacceptable-data-access-restrictions.

Before we proceed with your manuscript, please address the following prompts:

a) If there are ethical or legal restrictions on sharing a de-identified data set, please explain them in detail (e.g., data contain potentially identifying or sensitive patient information, data are owned by a third-party organization, etc.) and who has imposed them (e.g., a Research Ethics Committee or Institutional Review Board, etc.). Please also provide contact information for a data access committee, ethics committee, or other institutional body to which data requests may be sent.

b) If there are no restrictions, please upload the minimal anonymized data set necessary to replicate your study findings to a stable, public repository and provide us with the relevant URLs, DOIs, or accession numbers. Please see http://www.bmj.com/content/340/bmj.c181.long for guidelines on how to de-identify and prepare clinical data for publication. For a list of recommended repositories, please see https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/recommended-repositories. You also have the option of uploading the data as Supporting Information files, but we would recommend depositing data directly to a data repository if possible.

Please update your Data Availability statement in the submission form accordingly.

3. Please amend either the abstract on the online submission form (via Edit Submission) or the abstract in the manuscript so that they are identical.

4. Please include a separate caption for each figure in your manuscript.

5. Please review your reference list to ensure that it is complete and correct. If you have cited papers that have been retracted, please include the rationale for doing so in the manuscript text, or remove these references and replace them with relevant current references. Any changes to the reference list should be mentioned in the rebuttal letter that accompanies your revised manuscript. If you need to cite a retracted article, indicate the article’s retracted status in the References list and also include a citation and full reference for the retraction notice.

Dear Authors,

Congratulation to come up with quite relevant protocol for publication.

Please just attend to the relevant comments and suggestions given from peer reviews. Fortunately, a lot of reviewers were interested in the review of your protocol.

Good luck!

Zewdu

[Note: HTML markup is below. Please do not edit.]

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. Does the manuscript provide a valid rationale for the proposed study, with clearly identified and justified research questions?

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

Reviewer #3: Partly

Reviewer #4: Yes

Reviewer #5: Yes

Reviewer #6: Yes

Reviewer #7: Partly

Reviewer #8: Yes

Reviewer #9: Yes

Reviewer #10: Yes

**********

2. Is the protocol technically sound and planned in a manner that will lead to a meaningful outcome and allow testing the stated hypotheses??>

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

Reviewer #3: Partly

Reviewer #4: Yes

Reviewer #5: Yes

Reviewer #6: Yes

Reviewer #7: Partly

Reviewer #8: Yes

Reviewer #9: Partly

Reviewer #10: Yes

**********

3. Is the methodology feasible and described in sufficient detail to allow the work to be replicable??>

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

Reviewer #3: No

Reviewer #4: Yes

Reviewer #5: Yes

Reviewer #6: Yes

Reviewer #7: No

Reviewer #8: Yes

Reviewer #9: Yes

Reviewer #10: No

**********

4. Have the authors described where all data underlying the findings will be made available when the study is complete??>

The PLOS Data policy

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

Reviewer #3: No

Reviewer #4: Yes

Reviewer #5: Yes

Reviewer #6: Yes

Reviewer #7: Yes

Reviewer #8: Yes

Reviewer #9: Yes

Reviewer #10: Yes

**********

5. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English??>

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

Reviewer #3: Yes

Reviewer #4: Yes

Reviewer #5: Yes

Reviewer #6: Yes

Reviewer #7: Yes

Reviewer #8: Yes

Reviewer #9: No

Reviewer #10: Yes

**********

Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above and, if applicable, provide comments about issues authors must address before this protocol can be accepted for publication. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about research or publication ethics.

You may also provide optional suggestions and comments to authors that they might find helpful in planning their study.

Reviewer #1: India remains the leading contributor to global burden of tuberculosis and it is obvious that in order to reduce global TB burden we need to reduce TB burden in India. At the same time in order to achieve END-TB goals in India we need to address TB diagnostics and treatment issues, including TB gaps in case finding, in every region and district in India, what will eventually result in reduction of incidence and mortality of TB in whole country.

The manuscript provides lots of information and is a great example of national TB program activities in India.

Few comments:

1. Are volunteers involved in active case finding provided with personal respiratory protection (FFP2/FFP3 respirators) since they might be exposed to lots of presumptive TB patients?

2. Does the protocol involve active contact tracing or it is not a part of the study, but has already been implemented by NTP in India? To clarify, there is and will be information on cases already registered in the district and contacts from those cases will be known to the NTP identifying certain households as focus of TB infection and they should be targeted for LTBI/TB diagnostics. Will that work be done within the proposed protocol?

3. Following previous question – what are the follow-up actions if TB case , especially smear positive highly contagious, is identified throughout the study in the household ? will the be a return visit for LTBI screening and possible LTBI treatment?

4. Will rifampicin resistance/MDR be tested in cases throughout the study? Will treatment for DR TB be provided for those patients?

Reviewer #2: My general comments:

In general, the authors presented a study protocol (a quasi-experimental pre-post study) for active case finding and treatment of tuberculosis (TB), focusing on inhabitants aged >15 years residing in the Senapati District, Manipur, India. This study aims to engage the Student and Women Organizations (SAWOs) in augmenting the TB case finding and treatment, based on clinical symptoms, chest xray and sputum testing (using rapid molecular test-CBNAAT). The rationale for this study is very good.

My first concern is that the active case finding (ACF) and treatment for TB elimination and engaging organizations to enhance the effectiveness of ACF is a novel idea. This has been performed and published by Australian Research Teams (Guy B.Marks, Greg J.Fox et al., https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa1902129). My suggestion is that the authors should reconsider the word “novel community-led strategy revolutionizing…”. I think “scaled up” is better term.

My second concern is the significance of the gold standard for testing TB so that the comparison outcomes (TB case notification rate, adherence rate, and treatment outcome) between the intervention and control arms are more accurate. The rapid molecular test CBNAAT has been reported to have a sensitivity of 63% to 75% ((https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10654686/), indicating that approximately 25% to 37% of TB cases would be missed if only using the rapid molecular test CBNAAT. From my clinical and research knowledge, there will be a certain proportion of TB patients with trace calls by molecular TB testing ( about 50%-60% reveals negative TB culture). I think that there should be included TB culture (MGIT), regarding the true TB population with false negative CBNAAT and/or normal chest xray.

I highly believe that the TB culture (MGIT method…), applied for negative TB molecular testing with clinical and radiological findings consistent with tuberculosis, will ensure that the overall outcome comparisons between intervention and control arms are best accurate.

Reviewer #3: In this study protocol, the authors intend to study the impact of student and women organisations in improving TB case notifications. India has committed to end TB by 2025, this research seems to be late whereas such an intervention should have been a part of the program. Also, the protocol paper comes at a time when the sample collection is nearing completion.

Notwithstanding the above, as far as the protocol is concerned, there are a few issues that the authors need to clarify and address:

Details of the district including the health infrastructure both public and private, community-based organisations working for TB etc need to be elaborated for the reader to have an understanding the necessity of the intervention.

In the data from national program shared in Table 1 on TB notifications, adherence and outcomes it is observed that the program has achieved >100% of the target. It is strange that the authors mention they by this intervention achieve 80% success in the targets. The fact that the program has achieved more than the research proposes makes this study redundant.

The exclusion of the highly vulnerable populations such as mobile population/visitors, institutional populations (schools, colleges, offices, prisons, defence establishments, hospitals, nursing homes, hostels) and areas where survey operations are considered not to be feasible like insecurity areas is not clearly explained as large numbers of TB cases can be missed by such exclusion. The aim is to achieve a “comprehensive” approach to TB elimination.

Additionally, the authors have restricted the term “comprehensive approach” to the cascade of TB care whereas “comprehensive” would entail involvement of ALL stakeholders in the TB cascade such as private health care providers, NGOs/CBOs, TB champions etc.

Baseline assessment need to include anthropometric and nutrition data which are the current focus of all TB programs.

As per recommendation after symptom screening, X-ray screening comes next and then microbiological examination. This especially in a community setting and with the recent emphasis on asymptomatic sub clinical TB.

Linkages with the NTEP need to be elaborated in more detail in line 250.

Since the study is nearing completion, it would be good to provide interim data on achievement so far.

Lines 340, 341 mentioning direct costs, the authors mention doctor’s consultation fees, x-ray and sputum exam expenses - Where does this come in? cases are directly referred to NTEP!

Line 421, there is a mention of barriers to access to health care – was this studied in the study area what were the findings, if not this should be part of the study protocol.

Line 422, authors mention that the study addresses the social and behavioural factors that influence disease transmission as well as treatment outcomes by involving community members as active participants in TB control activities. What were these factors the authors wish to study? Were TB champions also involved in the process?

Line 435, the authors mention about the comprehensive approach. However, what they describe is the cascade of care and not a comprehensive approach which would entail involving all stakeholders in the process of ACF as mentioned above. Authors can refer to the many publications in the Indian context.

Reviewer #4: The objectives of the study protocol are clearly stated and ethically sound. Description of the research stages well described.

Would it be possible to mention the population size (15 y.o and above) of the Senapati district as according to the protocol approximately 316 volunteers will be involved to the activities ( 1 person per 150 households; 47,411 households in total) and later how many people were reached by volunteers, please?

On the implementation of the ACF phase, I would suggest to write more about Infection control measures for volunteers while making the screening, collecting sputum samples and packing specimens for the transportation to the laboratory. How the transportation of the specimen will be organized ( who transport, how, the distance to the nearest CB-NAAT point)

Although the study is ongoing, it is a second round of the ACF, I am looking forward seeing the results of the study!

Reviewer #5: The novelty of the concept may appear limited, as community systems for TB case finding have been previously documented in countries such as Ethiopia, South Africa, and Kenya, which the authors may wish to reference. Additionally, patient support group initiatives in Kerala bear some resemblance to this proposal, though these are more specifically targeted towards diagnosed patients.

A key contribution of this research could lie in its quantification of community systems—a measurement that has not yet been fully developed.

The authors should also consider providing a rationale for the target adjustments made by the National TB Program (NTP) over the years. This will support accurate impact estimation, as target adjustments are often subjectively set. Collaborating with WHO and the NTP team could help establish a reliable baseline, as solely relying on NTP targets might lead to skewed analysis.

Reviewer #6: This study is important highest TB burden country and the study is well designed and recommend to accept for publication.

Reviewer #7: 1. Methodology section is incomplete

2. CRF components to be mentioned in the methodology section

3. Difference between ACF by NTEP and ECF executed by this project to be mentioned in detail. Also the uniqueness and novelty of the study in terms of community engagement and its difference from the existing community outreach programs by NMC to be mentioned in detail

4. Target population to be defined precisely

5. Any similar studies done in other countries or other programs may be quoted as reference

Reviewer #8: Major Comments

Page 3, Line 33-36: The introduction needs better contextualization of the TB burden in Manipur. Specific local challenges could be highlighted in more detail, beyond the general statement about India's TB burden. This would strengthen the rationale for the study.

Page 4, Line 77-84: The study timeline is mentioned to be extended by 6 months due to disruptions, but the impact of these disruptions on study outcomes is not fully discussed. Please elaborate on how these events might affect the findings, participant retention, or data collection.

Page 5, Line 107-110: The TB burden in Senapati district is noted as unknown, yet a similar neighboring district's TB burden is cited. Consider providing more data or clarifying why exact prevalence estimates are unavailable. This would support the choice of study site and methodology.

Page 15, Line 373-374: The methodology lacks detail on how potential confounders will be identified and controlled in the logistic regression analysis. Please specify the strategies for confounder identification and handling, as this is crucial for the robustness of the results.

Minor Comments

Page 2: A more detailed definition of the role of Student and Women Organizations (SAWOs) would benefit readers unfamiliar with these groups.

Page 7, Line 158: Typo in 'volunteers give written consent' - 'give' should be 'gave'. Please correct verb tense consistency.

Reviewer #9: The protocol does indeed present a novel approach to TB case finding and overall TB control in Senapati District of Manipur,India.

The use of student and women local organisations offers an opportunity for ownership of the intervention by the community and some assurance of sustainability after project life

The protocol is presented soundly and manages to put across activities that will carried out during project life.

However,the authors could consider the following to make the protocol more clearer and avoid confusion with the readers;

For example,line 196-198 talks about village mapping and assigning of unique identification numbers to participants according to the designated area. It will be helpful for the authors to describe and show how this process will be implemented

Line 215-217 talks about screening tools…the authors should state that a symptom screening tool will be used other and state any other tool will be used if any

Line 393-399,the authors describe payments/stipends that will be given to the volunteers.

• An honorarium of ₹500 per month

• mobile recharge of ₹700 per quarter

• NTEP schemes NTEP ;

informant incentive (₹500/-

Patient support incentive;₹1000 for drug sensitive TB patients and ₹5000 for MDR-TB

It would helpful for the authors to provide context and justification for these payments and how they circle back to sustainability after project life.

Overally,this protocol could benefit from a copy editor to make readability and flow of the protocol better.

Reviewer #10: The manuscript describes an interesting approach to TB case finding in a vulnerable and a violence prone area in East India. The effort to undertake it is laudable. This reviewer offers the following comments.

1. At the onset it would be desirable to know why 64% of TB symptomatics do not seek treatment. The Project should aim to elicit some responses from the TB cases detected in the study to guide mitigation strategies in the location context.

2. The method section needs to elaborate on the approach to handling of asymptomatics between the 2 phases of intervention

3. It is unclear as to who has designed the costing tool and how is the costing data going to be analyzed. The researcher team needs to be well trained in eliciting responses to costing questions which would be best undertaken in the paper format.

4. The methods section also needs to describe the deployment of human resources for each household and estimate the time taken to complete the activities for identification of TB cases at the household level. Would be useful for future studies using a similar approach.

5. It should be clarified as to what were the selection criteria if any for the SAWO volunteers

6. The interim time period between the 2 intervention phases of 6 months appears on the lower side. A period of 12 months may have been more productive. In between the SAWO volunteers could be engaged in community health education activities to supplement case finding.

7. Fig.1 is indicative of good outcome indices. Would the present initiative be able to better these outcomes significantly. If any other foreseen tangible benefits to the community are identified, it would be helpful to mention them.

8. Reasons for refusal to participate in the survey should also be recorded and analysed.

We look forward to the results arising from this approach which maybe further strengthened by observations on its sustainability.

9. In the section on exposure to risk factors (line 118), the level of undernutrition in the community needs mentioning in view of the low SES and the high prevalence of TB.

10.Taking as an example the questionnaire on TB KAP Section 2 and 3 words like "drug resistant TB", virus, bacteria, fungi (Section 2) and "public health problem" (section 3) should be replaced in a way that is understood by the local population.

**********

what does this mean? ). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: Yes:  Thanh Tat Nguyen

Reviewer #3: No

Reviewer #4: No

Reviewer #5: Yes:  Shibu Vijayan

Reviewer #6: No

Reviewer #7: Yes:  Dr.Krithikaa Sekar

Reviewer #8: No

Reviewer #9: No

Reviewer #10: No

**********

[NOTE: If reviewer comments were submitted as an attachment file, they will be attached to this email and accessible via the submission site. Please log into your account, locate the manuscript record, and check for the action link "View Attachments". If this link does not appear, there are no attachment files.]

While revising your submission, please upload your figure files to the Preflight Analysis and Conversion Engine (PACE) digital diagnostic tool, https://pacev2.apexcovantage.com/ . PACE helps ensure that figures meet PLOS requirements. To use PACE, you must first register as a user. Registration is free. Then, login and navigate to the UPLOAD tab, where you will find detailed instructions on how to use the tool. If you encounter any issues or have any questions when using PACE, please email PLOS at figures@plos.org

Attachment

Submitted filename: Peer Review-Manuscript PONE-D-24-38779.docx

pone.0326324.s002.docx (20.2KB, docx)
Attachment

Submitted filename: comment.docx

pone.0326324.s003.docx (12.7KB, docx)
PLoS One. 2025 Jul 3;20(7):e0326324. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0326324.r002

Author response to Decision Letter 1


4 Apr 2025

I. Peer Review for MEDIN Manuscript PONE-D-24-38779

Date: 22-October-2024

“Breaking barriers for TB elimination: A novel community-led strategy revolutionizing Tuberculosis case finding and treatment support in Senapati District of Manipur-A quasi-experimental pre-post study protocol”

These are my comments in the peer review for the manuscript requested.

My general comments:

In general, the authors presented a study protocol (a quasi-experimental pre-post study) for active case finding and treatment of tuberculosis (TB), focusing on inhabitants aged >15 years residing in the Senapati District, Manipur, India. This study aims to engage the Student and Women Organizations (SAWOs) in augmenting the TB case finding and treatment, based on clinical symptoms, chest xray and sputum testing (using rapid molecular test-CBNAAT). The rationale for this study is very good.

Commnet 1. My first concern is that the active case finding (ACF) and treatment for TB elimination and engaging organizations to enhance the effectiveness of ACF is a novel idea. This has been performed and published by Australian Research Teams (Guy B.Marks, Greg J.Fox et al., https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa1902129). My suggestion is that the authors should reconsider the word “novel community-led strategy revolutionizing…”. I think “scaled up” is better term.

Response 1. We had used the term novel in the title, based on the existing literature, as we are involving the organized Student And Women Organizations (SAWOs) in TB case finding or in providing support during treatment. Though previous studies have engaged community members such as Community Healthcare Workers (CHWs), Accredited Social Health Activists (ASHAs), National Service Scheme (NSS) students and elementary and secondary school students, these individuals did not operate within a formal organizational structure that contributes to village-level decision-making on broader issues.

The SAWOs engaged in this project are well-structured organizations with clearly defined roles and responsibilities. They represent youth & women from their respective villages, communities, districts and collectively participate in larger forums to advance common goals and objectives. Leadership positions within these organizations are typically given to active and influential members of the group, chosen through an election process.

Each village, church and community (both tribal and non-tribal) has its own youth and women organizations. Members of student organizations include those who are currently pursuing their studies, or have either completed their education or have dropped out. However, most student leaders are individuals who have completed their education and are not currently employed.

Similarly, members of women organizations are primarily married women including widows, divorcees as well as those living with their husband and children. This project is built on the four pillars of India's National Strategic plan that is Detect, treat, and prevent, Build. This project tries to address the cascade of care from educating people about TB to the identification of TB cases to the completion of the treatment. This study brings a novel and comprehensive approach to addressing TB in the community by integrating SAWO engagement, cost-effectiveness analysis and a participatory research design. These elements set it apart from both NTEP’s ACF, which is more focused on diagnostic surveillance. By fostering community ownership, addressing all pillars of the END TB strategy and evaluating the economic impact, our study offers a holistic, inclusive and evaluative model for improving TB controls that could provide valuable insights for future TB programs.

In view of the foregoing rationale of engaging a unique & distinctly placed active and influential community group, operating from within a formal organizational structure, who are elected through a democratic process and contribute to village-level decision making on broader issues, and thus offer an opportunity for ownership of the intervention and some assurance of sustainability after project life, the authors think the study to be novel and thus request the Reviewer if novelty can be retained in the title of the manuscript, considering this group as a novel one, which is not the same as used in the referred publication by Australia research team.

Comment 2. My second concern is the significance of the gold standard for testing TB so that the comparison outcomes (TB case notification rate, adherence rate, and treatment outcome) between the intervention and control arms are more accurate. The rapid molecular test CBNAAT has been reported to have a sensitivity of 63% to 75% ((https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10654686/), indicating that approximately 25% to 37% of TB cases would be missed if only using the rapid molecular test CBNAAT. From my clinical and research knowledge, there will be a certain proportion of TB patients with trace calls by molecular TB testing ( about 50%-60% reveals negative TB culture). I think that there should be included TB culture (MGIT), regarding the true TB population with false negative CBNAAT and/or normal chest xray.

Response 2. We agree with the Reviewer’s concern. However, the study district is a hard-to-reach area, and the testing is adopted as per recommendations of NTEP to use the molecular method as the first diagnostic tool to diagnose TB in this area, so that we can detect TB and DR-TB without delay. All our interventions have been implemented as per the routine NTEP activities except involving the volunteers from each village to carry out the activities. As per the local TB program, CBNAAT has been used as the first diagnostic tool to diagnose the disease followed by chest X-Ray for those individuals whose sputum results turn out to be negative. Similarly, we are doing it in a programmatic mode to maintain the accuracy of our intervention (pre-and post). The suggestion is 100% valid that we may miss approximately 25% to 37% of TB cases. However, adding culture (MGIT) will become a new intervention but the local NTEP is not doing it, and this may be considered as a limitation of the study, as this will further delay the study completion, which is both time bound and financially constrained. We will however recommend this to NETP to add culture / MGIT and make it program inclusive.

Comment 3. I highly believe that the TB culture (MGIT method…), applied for negative TB molecular testing with clinical and radiological findings consistent with tuberculosis, will ensure that the overall outcome comparisons between intervention and control arms are best accurate.

Response 3. Though we are not doing culture for those CBNAAT-negative samples as per the local TB program. However, we are referring those individuals whose sputum turns out to be negative in the CBNAAT test to the nearest chest X-Ray centre for further investigations, as mentioned in the revised manuscript, line numbers 289 to 295.

My specific comments:

1. Title:

The title needs to be reconsidered, regarding the term “novel community-led strategy revolutionizing….”, because active case finding TB and treatment and engaging organizations is not a breakthrough.

Response: We had used the term novel in the title, based on the existing literature, as we are involving the organized Student And Women Organizations (SAWOs) in TB case finding or in providing support during treatment. Though previous studies have engaged community members such as Community Healthcare Workers (CHWs), Accredited Social Health Activists (ASHAs), National Service Scheme (NSS) students and elementary and secondary school students, these individuals did not operate within a formal organizational structure that contributes to village-level decision-making on broader issues.

The SAWOs engaged in this project are well-structured organizations with clearly defined roles and responsibilities. They represent youth & women from their respective villages, communities, districts and collectively participate in larger forums to advance common goals and objectives. Leadership positions within these organizations are typically given to active and influential members of the group, chosen through an election process. Each village, church and community (both tribal and non-tribal) has its own youth and women organizations. Members of student organizations include those who are currently pursuing their studies, or have either completed their education or have dropped out. However, most student leaders are individuals who have completed their education and are not currently employed. Similarly, members of women organizations are primarily married women including widows, divorcees as well as those living with their husband and children.

This project is built on the four pillars of India's National Strategic plan that is Detect, treat, and prevent, Build. This project tries to address the cascade of care from educating people about TB to the identification of TB cases to the completion of the treatment.

This study brings a novel and comprehensive approach to addressing TB in the community by integrating SAWO engagement, cost-effectiveness analysis and a participatory research design. These elements set it apart from both NTEP’s ACF, which is more focused on diagnostic surveillance. By fostering community ownership, addressing all pillars of the END TB strategy and evaluating the economic impact, our study offers a holistic, inclusive and evaluative model for improving TB controls that could provide valuable insights for future TB programs.

In view of the foregoing rationale of engaging a unique & distinctly placed active and influential community group, operating from within a formal organizational structure, who are elected through a democratic process and contribute to village-level decision making on broader issues, and thus offer an opportunity for ownership of the intervention and some assurance of sustainability after project life, the authors think the study to be novel and thus request the Reviewer if novelty can be retained in the title of the manuscript, considering this group as a novel one, which is not the same as used in the referred publication by Australia research team.

2. Abstract: The abstract is clear, succinct, and well-written,

3. Introduction:

The introduction is very well written and clearly describes the TB burden in India and the rationale for this study to be conducted. The aims of this study have clearly been stated.

4. Materials and Methods:

The methods are well designed, structured and written.

4.1 I suggest that the authors think more about the number of TB patients with false negative rapid molecular test-CBNAAT (indeed, they have true TB infection) and trace calls from molecular testing (all estimated to account for 20%-30%) of all people tested with molecular testing. Further tuberculosis cultures (for example, with MGIT method) should be performed. This will ensure that the outcome comparisons between the intervention and control arms are accurate

Response: We agree with the Reviewer’s concern. However, the study district is a hard-to-reach area, and the testing is adopted as per recommendations of NTEP to use the molecular method as the first diagnostic tool to diagnose TB in this area, so that we can detect TB and DR-TB without delay. All our interventions have been implemented as per the routine NTEP activities except involving the volunteers from each village to carry out the activities. As per the local TB program, CBNAAT has been used as the first diagnostic tool to diagnose the disease followed by chest X-Ray for those individuals whose sputum results turn out to be negative. Similarly, we are doing it in a programmatic mode to maintain the accuracy of our intervention (pre-and post). The suggestion is 100% valid that we may miss approximately 25% to 37% of TB cases. However, adding culture (MGIT) will become a new intervention but the local NTEP is not doing it, and this may be considered as limitation of the study, as this will further delay the study completion, which is both time bound and financially constraint. We will however recommend this to NETP to add culture / MGIT and make it program inclusive.under ‘My General Comments’.

4.2 I also think the authors should clarify the sampling method in village mapping and household enumeration (Lines 186 and 193). It should be randomly selected using a computerized generated sampling method in predetermining villages for intervention and standard-care arms. These factors are significant for preventing potential selection bias.

Response: Our study is a pre-post study design, which involves screening of all the villages of the study district (as highlighted in line numbers 206 -213) village mapping is being carried out for the whole villages of the district, and household enumeration is done based on the study eligibility criteria for the whole district population. Hence there is no selection bias in the sampling method in village mapping and household enumeration.

4.3 Regarding the study population, the exclusion of mobile population/visitors and institution populations (Lines 135-138) should be carefully considered. On the one hand, this will enhance survey completion and retention rates. On the other hand, these populations can further transmit the tuberculosis (in cases with undiagnosed active TB), moving from this village to other villages of the study sites. As a result, this will influence the primary study outcomes of TB notification rates and outcomes at a certain level.

From my personal view, I recommend including mobile populations, regarding my above consideration in balance with maximizing the retention rate in the study, generalizability, and optimizing the number of population receiving TB treatment and reducing cross-transmission. However, the authors should consider this point further.

Response: Since our project covers all the villages of Senapati district, intra-district migration from one village to another in the same district (i.e., within district migration) issues have been taken care and we are able to include such mobile populations. Further, based on our enumeration and 1st round of screening experiences even after excluding the mobile population, we came across a huge population difference in the enumerated population and the number of people who have been screened during the 1st round of screening. We have randomly selected a few villages to cross verify the reasons for not being able to be screened in the 1st round of screening after being included during the enumeration. We found that a lot of people migrate to other districts and states for work/studies. However, we cannot capture such mobile populations, which move from the study district to another district/state and this becomes limitation of the study as this is beyond the scope of our study. On the other hand, we could consider including the institution populations like schools, colleges and offices as screening is done early morning and evening. We have made the changes accordingly in our study inclusion criteria in the revised manuscript, line numbers 151-155.

5. Discussion: This is well supported and well written.

� My final decision: I think this is a great study and I support this study to be proceeded.

II. Reviewer comments (6)

This study is very important and the study is well designed. I have only minor comments below.

1. It is very important to instruct patients about how to collect quality sputum for the quality diagnosis but author did not mention it.

2. Out of two sputum collected (spot and early morning), which one is used for CBNAAT test?

Comment 1. It is very important to instruct patients about how to collect quality sputum for the quality diagnosis but author did not mention it.

Response 1. We thank the Reviewer for acknowledging our research work.

Regarding the quality sputum collections, we have provided adequate instructions and trained the volunteers during the two-day hands-on training sessions organized on how to extract quality sputum and take care of the several aspects of collecting the sputum samples, which are as follows:

1. To go to open space/well-ve

Attachment

Submitted filename: 2. Response to Reviewers.docx

pone.0326324.s005.docx (74.8KB, docx)

Decision Letter 1

Zewdu Dememew

Breaking barriers for TB elimination: A novel community-led strategy revolutionizing Tuberculosis case finding and treatment support in Senapati District Manipur-A quasi-experimental pre-post study protocol

PONE-D-24-38779R1

Dear Dr. Harpreet Kaur and team,

We’re pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been judged scientifically suitable for publication and will be formally accepted for publication once it meets all outstanding technical requirements.

Within one week, you’ll receive an e-mail detailing the required amendments. When these have been addressed, you’ll receive a formal acceptance letter and your manuscript will be scheduled for publication.

An invoice will be generated when your article is formally accepted. Please note, if your institution has a publishing partnership with PLOS and your article meets the relevant criteria, all or part of your publication costs will be covered. Please make sure your user information is up-to-date by logging into Editorial Manager at Editorial Manager®  and clicking the ‘Update My Information' link at the top of the page. If you have any questions relating to publication charges, please contact our Author Billing department directly at authorbilling@plos.org.

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please notify them about your upcoming paper to help maximize its impact. If they’ll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team as soon as possible -- no later than 48 hours after receiving the formal acceptance. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information, please contact onepress@plos.org.

Kind regards,

Zewdu Gashu Dememew, M.D, PhD

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Additional Editor Comments (optional):

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. Does the manuscript provide a valid rationale for the proposed study, with clearly identified and justified research questions?

Reviewer #3: Yes

Reviewer #4: Yes

Reviewer #7: Partly

Reviewer #9: Yes

Reviewer #10: Yes

**********

2. Is the protocol technically sound and planned in a manner that will lead to a meaningful outcome and allow testing the stated hypotheses??>

Reviewer #3: Yes

Reviewer #4: Yes

Reviewer #7: Yes

Reviewer #9: Yes

Reviewer #10: Yes

**********

3. Is the methodology feasible and described in sufficient detail to allow the work to be replicable??>

Reviewer #3: Yes

Reviewer #4: Yes

Reviewer #7: Yes

Reviewer #9: Yes

Reviewer #10: Yes

**********

4. Have the authors described where all data underlying the findings will be made available when the study is complete??>

The PLOS Data policy

Reviewer #3: No

Reviewer #4: Yes

Reviewer #7: Yes

Reviewer #9: Yes

Reviewer #10: Yes

**********

5. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English??>

Reviewer #3: Yes

Reviewer #4: Yes

Reviewer #7: Yes

Reviewer #9: Yes

Reviewer #10: Yes

**********

Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above and, if applicable, provide comments about issues authors must address before this protocol can be accepted for publication. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about research or publication ethics.

You may also provide optional suggestions and comments to authors that they might find helpful in planning their study.

Reviewer #3: The authors have addressed all the comments satisfactorily within the constraints of geography, timing, resources and other limitations as indicated in their responses.

Reviewer #4: All questions of reviewers has been answered in an understandable manner. Looking forward on the study results! Good luck!

Reviewer #7: This is a well written manuscript. However, I would like to suggest a few revisions to the manuscript

1. As you had mentioned, SAWOs are already engaged in healthcare community engagement activities and in various welfare programs provided by the government. Hence, this idea may not be entirely "novel" as this is an extension of NTEP activities. So the word "novel" in the title may be reconsidered and alternate terminologies like "repurposed" or "redesignated" may be used.

2. Indicators for monitoring and evaluation of the study may be mentioned methodology section

3. Sample size or Expected prevalence does not compensate for the missed out vulnerable population, who are also the residents of the district. Hence the same may be mentioned.

Thanks and Regards

Dr. Krithikaa Sekar

Reviewer #9: The authors have responded to all the highlighted concerns sufficiently.I have no further concerns with the protocol.

Reviewer #10: The authors have adequately responded to the questions posed by this Reviewer. Some details in Methods could have been added in this protocol paper to guide future studies but hopefully the authors will do so in subsequent publications of the results

**********

what does this mean? ). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy

Reviewer #3: Yes:  Dr. Yatin Dholakia

Reviewer #4: Yes:  MD Aiymgul Duishekeeva, Kyrgyzstan

Reviewer #7: Yes:  Krithikaa Sekar

Reviewer #9: No

Reviewer #10: No

**********

Acceptance letter

Zewdu Dememew

PONE-D-24-38779R1

PLOS ONE

Dear Dr. Kaur,

I'm pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been deemed suitable for publication in PLOS ONE. Congratulations! Your manuscript is now being handed over to our production team.

At this stage, our production department will prepare your paper for publication. This includes ensuring the following:

* All references, tables, and figures are properly cited

* All relevant supporting information is included in the manuscript submission,

* There are no issues that prevent the paper from being properly typeset

You will receive further instructions from the production team, including instructions on how to review your proof when it is ready. Please keep in mind that we are working through a large volume of accepted articles, so please give us a few days to review your paper and let you know the next and final steps.

Lastly, if your institution or institutions have a press office, please let them know about your upcoming paper now to help maximize its impact. If they'll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team within the next 48 hours. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information, please contact onepress@plos.org.

If we can help with anything else, please email us at customercare@plos.org.

Thank you for submitting your work to PLOS ONE and supporting open access.

Kind regards,

PLOS ONE Editorial Office Staff

on behalf of

Dr. Zewdu Gashu Dememew

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Associated Data

    This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

    Supplementary Materials

    S1 File

    Study tools and questionnaires used for data collection. Includes: Annexure I – Presumptive TB Case Referral Slip. Annexure II – TB Knowledge, Attitude, and Practice Questionnaire. Annexure III – Household Enumeration Questionnaire. Annexure IV – First Round TB Symptom Screening Tool. Annexure V – Second Round TB Symptom Screening Tool. Annexure VI – Part 1: Cost Identification Post-Treatment Initiation. Annexure VII – Parts 2 & 3: Cost Identification at End of Intensive Phase & End of Treatment.

    (DOCX)

    pone.0326324.s001.docx (526.1KB, docx)
    Attachment

    Submitted filename: Peer Review-Manuscript PONE-D-24-38779.docx

    pone.0326324.s002.docx (20.2KB, docx)
    Attachment

    Submitted filename: comment.docx

    pone.0326324.s003.docx (12.7KB, docx)
    Attachment

    Submitted filename: 2. Response to Reviewers.docx

    pone.0326324.s005.docx (74.8KB, docx)

    Data Availability Statement

    No datasets were generated or analysed during the current study. All relevant data from this study will be made available upon study completion. Deidentified research data will be made publicly available when the study is completed and published.


    Articles from PLOS One are provided here courtesy of PLOS

    RESOURCES