Skip to main content
. 2016 Apr 28;11(4):e0154095. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0154095

Table 3. Studies excluded from quantitative analysis.

Study Type of study Population Dot intervention Outcome Effect Reason(s) for exclusion
Bock 2001 [20] Historically controlled study Non-adherent TB patients Yes Indirect economic support Adherence ≤32 weeks OR 5.73 [CI 2.25–14.84] ≤52 weeks 7.29 [2.45-22-73] Methodological diversity: outcome different than in other studies.
Davidson 2000 [56] Case-control study TB patients Yes Indirect economic support Adherence The odds that a patients with 100% adherence under incentives program will adhere 2.7 (1.01100) times as great as person receiving the basic incentive package. Methodological diversity: not possible to calculate absolute numbers from the effects.
Gelmanova 2011 [66] Case series TB patients that participated in at least one intervention to improve adherence before referral to the Sputnik program. Yes Home visits, other psychological and other social support Adherence Increased from 52.2% [CI 47.5–56.9] to 81.4% [CI 76.8–86.0] Methodological and clinical diversity: high risk of bias on the ‘selection’ and ‘outcome’ domain (S2 Table). Study population only includes non-adherent patients, which were their own controls.
Wei 2012 [63] Controlled before–and–after study (Poor) Migrant TB patients Unclear Direct economic support Treatment success, loss to follow-up and death. Significant reduction of default rates (11% vs 1%, P = 0.03) in intervention district compared to the control district This study was part of a bigger study (Zou et al. 2013 [64]), therefore this study was excluded.