ArticleAmerican journal of public health2017
The End of Written Informed Consent for HIV Testing: Not With a Bang but a Whimper.
Article in American journal of public health, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- An overview of consent requirements for HIV and viral hepatitis B and C testing in Europe.HIV medicine · 2026Article
- "How much more on the nurse?:" a qualitative analysis of inpatient nurses' perspectives on offering HIV testing.BMC nursing · 2025Article
- National HIV and HCV Screening Rates for Hospitalized People who Use Drugs Are Suboptimal and Heterogeneous Across 11 US Hospitals.Open forum infectious diseases · 2024Article
- Racial and Ethnic Disparities in HIV Testing in People Who Use Drugs Admitted to a Tertiary Care Hospital.AIDS patient care and STDs · 2022Article
- Reducing False-Positive Results With Fourth-Generation HIV Testing at a Veterans Affairs Medical Center.Federal practitioner : for the health care professionals of the VA, DoD, and PHS · 2021Article
- Trends in HIV Testing Among US Adults, Aged 18-64 Years, 2011-2017.AIDS and behavior · 2020Article
- Comparing Routine HIV and Hepatitis C Virus Screening to Estimate the Effect of Required Consent on HIV Screening Rates Among Hospitalized Patients.Public health reports (Washington, D.C. : 1974)Article
- State Trends in HIV Testing Among US Adults Aged 18-64 Years, 2011-2017.Public health reports (Washington, D.C. : 1974)Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
In 2014, only two states in the United States still mandated specific written informed consent for HIV testing and, after years of controversy, New York ended this requirement, leaving only Nebraska. New York's shift to opt-out testing meant that a singular feature of what had characterized the exceptionalism surrounding HIV testing was eliminated. We trace the history of debates on written informed consent nationally and in New York State. Over the years of dispute from when HIV testing was initiated in 1985 to 2014, the evidence about the benefits and burdens of written informed consent changed. Just as important was the transformation of the political configuration of HIV advocacy and funding, both nationwide and in New York State. What had for years been the subject of furious debate over what a rational and ethical screening policy required came to an end without the slightest public protest. (Am J Public Health. 2017;107:1259-1265. doi:10.2105/AJPH.2017.303819).
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.