Table 2.
Data collected from the systematic literature review.
| region | TB incidence per 100 000 | reinfection proportion (p) | reference |
|---|---|---|---|
| US and Canada | 6a | 0.04 (3/75) | Jasmer et al. [18] |
| Australia | 8a | 0.27 (4/15) | Dobler et al. [19] |
| Denmark | 13a | 0.26 (19/73) | Bang et al. [20] |
| Lombardy | 18 | 0.16 (5/32) | Bandera et al. [21] |
| Houston | 19 | 0.24 (6/25) | El Sahly et al. [22] |
| Spain | 34a | 0.20 (8/40) | Martín et al. [23] |
| Taiwan | 62 | 0.51 (25/49) | Wang et al. [3] |
| China | 107a | 0.62 (32/52) | Shen et al. [24] |
| Madras | 184a | 0.31 (9/29) | Sahadevan et al. [25] |
| India | 184a | 0.50 (24/48) | Narayanan et al. [26] |
| Bangladesh | 242a | 0.14 (5/35) | Shamputa et al. [27] |
| Rwanda | 405a | 0.31 (4/13) | Umubyeyi et al. [28] |
| Malawi | 447a | 0.33 (13/39) | Crampin et al. [29] |
| Cape Town | 761 | 0.77 (24/31) | Verver et al. [4] |
aWHO estimates for TB incidence in 2000.