ArticleJournal of community health2011
A review of missed opportunities for prenatal HIV screening in a nationwide sample of health facilities in the Indian Health Service.
Article in Journal of community health, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- HIV, Chlamydia, Gonorrhea, and Primary and Secondary Syphilis among American Indians and Alaska Natives Within Indian Health Service Areas in the United States, 2007-2010.Journal of community health · 2015Article
- Health behaviors and risk factors among American Indians and Alaska Natives, 2000-2010.American journal of public health · 2014Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
To better serve our patients, we sought to identify missed opportunities for prenatal HIV screening across Indian Health Service and potential ways to increase screening. Twenty-seven of 161 Federal or Tribal IHS health facilities were randomly selected. Each facility received a standardized set of commands to identify the charts of prenatal patients who were not screened for HIV according to the national Health Information Technology (HIT) platform. We reviewed 598 records at 27 sites of prenatal patients who were identified as not screened for HIV during their pregnancy. According to on-site chart review, nearly half (267/598, 45%) had been screened for HIV, and a slight majority (331/598, 55%) had not been screened. Among the 331 pregnant women not screened for HIV, about half had no HIV screening despite having had ≥2 prenatal care encounters and no screening exclusions (167/331, 50%). A majority of missed opportunities (118/167, 71%) had prenatal testing for other infectious diseases. Based on these results, the National HIV/AIDS program has encouraged increased bundling of HIV with infectious disease tests in prenatal laboratory panels. Improvements in documentation of HIV screening are expected with the IHS transition to electronic health records.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.