Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24512462›Full record

ArticleBMC infectious diseases2014

Community-based HCV screening: knowledge and attitudes in a high risk urban population.

Brianna L Norton, Corrine I Voils, Sarah H Timberlake, Emily J Hecker, Neela D Goswami, Kim M Huffman, Anneka Landgraf, Susanna Naggie, Jason E Stout

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC infectious diseases, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 33 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
33citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
3.1field-weighted citation impact, top 7% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

33 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 55 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Recommendations on hepatitis C screening for adults.CMAJ : Canadian Medical Association journal = journal de l'Association medicale canadienne · 2017
    Guideline
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. International journal of environmental research and public health · 2019
    Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Brianna L NortonDivision of Infectious Diseases and International Health, Duke University Medical Center, Box 102358, Durham, NC 27710, USA. bnorton@montefiore.org.
Corrine I Voils
Sarah H Timberlake
Emily J Hecker
Neela D Goswami
Kim M Huffman
Anneka Landgraf
Susanna Naggie
Jason E Stout
Duke University Hospital · USDuke Medical Center · USDurham VA Medical Center · US

Funding

Moving Towards More Individualized Therapies in HIV/HCV Co-infected PatientsK23AI096913 · NIAID · DUKE UNIVERSITY · PI NAGGIE, SUSANNA · 2011 to 2014
$355k
NIAID NIH HHS K23 AI096913
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIn an attempt to curtail the rising morbidity and mortality from undiagnosed HCV (hepatitis C virus) in the United States, screening guidelines have been expanded to high-risk individuals and persons born 1945-1965. Community-based screening may be one strategy in which to reach such persons; however, the acceptance of HCV testing, when many high-risk individuals may not have access to HCV specific medications, remains unknown.

methodsWe set out to assess attitudes about HCV screening and knowledge about HCV disease at several community-based testing sites that serve high-risk populations. This assessment was paired with a brief HCV educational intervention, followed by post-education evaluation.

resultsParticipants (n = 140) were surveyed at five sites; two homeless shelters, two drug rehabilitation centers, and a women's "drop-in" center. Personal acceptance of HCV testing was almost unanimous, and 90% of participants reported that they would still want to be tested even if they were unable to receive HCV treatment. Baseline hepatitis C knowledge was poor; however, the brief educational intervention significantly improved knowledge and increased acceptability of testing when medical access issues were explicitly stated.

conclusionsDespite inconsistencies in access to care and treatment, high-risk communities want to know their HCV status. Though baseline HCV knowledge was poor in this population, a brief on-site educational intervention improved both knowledge and acceptability of HCV testing and care. These data support the establishment of programs that utilize community-based screening, and also provide initial evidence for acceptance of the implementation of the recently expanded screening guidelines among marginalized communities.

Indexed as

Health Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticeUrban PopulationAdolescentAdultAgedCommunity Health ServicesFemaleHealth EducationHealth LiteracyHepacivirusHepatitis CHumansIll-Housed PersonsMaleMass ScreeningMiddle Aged

Identifiers

PMID24512462
PMCPMC3945609
OpenAlexW2092582907

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.