ArticleBMC infectious diseases2015
A Birth-cohort testing intervention identified hepatitis c virus infection among patients with few identified risks: a cross-sectional study.
Article in BMC infectious diseases, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Improving HCV Risk Assessment and Testing in a Federally Qualified Health Center Setting in Baltimore, Maryland.Journal of community health · 2020Article
- Hepatitis C Prevalence and Management Among Patients Receiving Opioid Substitution Treatment in General Practice in Ireland: Baseline Data from a Feasibility Study.Interactive journal of medical research · 2018Article
- Obstacles to successful treatment of hepatitis C in uninsured patients from a minority population.Journal of translational medicine · 2018Article
- Survey of programmatic experiences and challenges in delivery of hepatitis B and C testing in low- and middle-income countries.BMC infectious diseases · 2017Article
- HCV management in resource-constrained countries.Hepatology international · 2017Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundInternational guidelines and U.S. guidelines prior to 2012 only recommended testing for hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection among patients at risk, but adherence to guidelines is poor, and the majority of those infected remain undiagnosed. A strategy to perform one-time testing of all patients born during 1945-1965, birth cohort testing, may diagnose HCV infection among patients whose risk remains unknown. We sought to determine if a birth-cohort testing intervention for HCV antibody positivity helped identify patients with fewer documented risk factors or medical indications than a pre-intervention, risk-based testing strategy.
methodsWe used a cross-sectional design with retrospective electronic medical record review to examine patients identified with HCV antibody positivity (Ab+) during a pre-intervention (risk-based) phase, the standard of care at the time, vs. a birth-cohort testing intervention phase. We compared demographic and clinical characteristics and HCV risk-associated factors among patients whose HCV Ab + was identified during the pre-intervention (risk-based testing) vs. post birth-cohort intervention phases. Study subjects were patients identified as HCV-Ab + in the baseline (risk-based) and birth-cohort testing phases of the Hepatitis C Assessment and Testing (HepCAT) Project.
resultsCompared to the risk-based phase, patients newly diagnosed with HCV Ab + after the birth-cohort intervention were significantly less likely to have a history of any substance abuse (30.5% vs. 49.5%, p = 0.02), elevated alanine transaminase levels of > 40 U/L (22.0% vs. 46.7%, p = 0.002), or the composite any risk-associated factor (55.9% vs. 79.0%, p = 0.002).
conclusionsBirth-cohort testing is an useful strategy for identifying previously undiagnosed HCV Ab + because it does not require providers ask risk-based questions, or patients to disclose risk behaviors, and appears to identify HCV Ab + in patients who would not have been identified using a risk-based testing strategy.
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.