ArticleOpen forum infectious diseases2017
Impact of an Electronic Medical Record-Based System to Promote Human Immunodeficiency Virus/Hepatitis C Virus Screening in Public Hospital Primary Care Clinics.
Article in Open forum infectious diseases, 2017. 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, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- What do primary care staff know and do about blood borne virus testing and care for migrant patients? A national survey.BMC public health · 2021Article
- Improving hepatitis C screening and diagnosis in patients born between 1945 and 1965 in a safety-net primary care clinic.BMJ open quality · 2019Article
- Hepatitis C Screening in Commercially Insured U.S. Birth-cohort Patients: Factors Associated with Testing and Effect of an EMR-based Screening Alert.Journal of translational internal medicine · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundUnited States guidelines recommend that all adolescents and adults be tested for human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) and that persons born between 1945 and 1965 be tested for hepatitis C virus (HCV).
methodsWe used electronic medical record (EMR) data to identify patients in 3 primary care clinics in Seattle, Washington who met national criteria for routine HCV or HIV testing and had no documented history of prior testing. Clinic staff received daily lists of untested patients with scheduled appointments. We used generalized linear models to compare the percentage of patients tested and newly diagnosed with HIV and HCV in the 18 months before and during the intervention.
resultsA total of 16784 patients aged 18-64 and 9370 patients born between 1945 and 1965 received care from January 2011 to December 2015. Comparing the preintervention and intervention periods, the percentage of previously untested patients tested for HIV and HCV increased from 14.9% to 30.8% and from 18.0% to 35.5%, respectively (
conclusionsEMR-based HCV/HIV testing promotion increased testing but not case finding among primary care patients in our medical center. In our institution, most HCV-infected patients are already diagnosed, primarily through risk-based and clinical screening, highlighting the need to concentrate future efforts on increasing HCV treatment.
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.