Social and behavioral risk reduction strategies for tuberculosis prevention in Canadian Inuit communities: a cost-effectiveness analysis

Table 2 TB risk factor specific multipliers applied to probabilities in decision analysis model

Outcome	MEASURE of EffecT^a	ESTIMATE (95% CI)	Comparison	Reference
SMOKING
Infection	Relative Risk	1.9 (1.6–2.3)	Ever or current smokers vs. never smokers	[11]
Active Disease	Relative Risk	1.5 (1.3–1.7)	Ever or current smokers vs. never smokers	[12]
Death	Relative Risk	2.6 (1.8–3.6)	Ever or current smokers vs. never smokers	[11]
HEAVY DRINKING
Infection	Relative Risk	2.9 (1.9–4.6)	≥40 g alcohol per day and/or alcohol use disorder vs. < 40 g alcohol per day and no alcohol use disorder	[38]
Active Disease	Relative Risk	4.2 (2.7–6.5)	≥40 g alcohol per day and/or alcohol use disorder vs. < 40 g alcohol per day and no alcohol use disorder	[39]
Death	Hazard Ratio	2.4 (1.1–5.3)	Addiction to alcohol vs. no addiction to alcohol^#	[40]
FOOD INSECURITY
Infection	Odds Ratio	2.1 (1.0–4.3)	Inadequate daily fruit/vegetable intake vs. adequate daily fruit/vegetable intake^b	[16]
Active Disease	Odds Ratio	2.4 (1.6–3.1)	People experiencing household food shortage vs. not experiencing household food shortage	[41]
OVERCROWDING
Infection	Relative Risk	1.5 (1.1–2.0)	Houses with > 1 person per room vs. houses with ≤ 1 person per room	[20]
Active Disease	Odds Ratio	1.3 (1.2–1.5)^c	For every additional 0.2 persons per room	[19]

^aWhere possible, we obtained adjusted estimates from each study
^bAdequacy of daily fruit and vegetable intake was determined based on North American reference standards for age and sex, assuming individuals had a “typical” level of physical activity
^cWe modified this estimate to reflect the added risk for every additional 1 person per room (we used 1.3⁵ = 3.7 [95 % CI 2.5 − 7.6])

ISSN: 1471-2458