ReviewWMJ : official publication of the State Medical Society of Wisconsin2008
Updated CDC guidelines for HIV testing: a review for Wisconsin practitioners.
Review in WMJ : official publication of the State Medical Society of Wisconsin, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Ethical Approach in Sharing HIV Test Results with Patients in Türkiye: Evaluation of Patient Impressions with Demographic Data.Sisli Etfal Hastanesi tip bulteni · 2025Article
- Diarrhoea due to small bowel diseases.Best practice & research. Clinical gastroenterology · 2012Review
- Disparity in health care: HIV, stigma, and marginalization in Nepal.Journal of the International AIDS Society · 2009Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
An estimated 250,000 people in the United States are living with undiagnosed human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection. Those who are unaware they are HIV-infected miss opportunities for early treatment and may unknowingly infect others. Early identification of HIV-infected individuals benefits both the infected individuals and the health of the public. To decrease the number of individuals unaware that they are HIV-infected, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) recently revised its recommendations for HIV testing in health care settings. Changes in the CDC-recommended HIV testing protocol include expanding the population to be routinely tested and streamlining the testing and consent process. This article discusses the CDC recommendations, current Wisconsin laws regarding HIV testing, challenges associated with reconciling these laws with current CDC guidelines, and ethical concerns surrounding the guidelines. The authors conclude that Wisconsin health care professionals should adopt the CDC recommendations for HIV testing. However, to fully implement the revised CDC testing protocol, Wisconsin law will need to be amended. Adoption of these recommendations would increase the number of people in Wisconsin who are aware of their HIV-positive status and can then receive timely treatment and information about preventing HIV transmission.
Indexed as
Identifiers
18593083PMC2536748W1541923733What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.