Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29451875›Full record

SynthesisPloS one2018

Linkage to HIV care following diagnosis in the WHO European Region: A systematic review and meta-analysis, 2006-2017.

Sara Croxford, Zheng Yin, Fiona Burns, Andrew Copas, Katy Town, Sarika Desai, Andrew Skingsley, Valerie Delpech, OptTEST project

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in PloS one, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 27 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
27citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

27 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Frontiers in pharmacology · 2021
    Article
  18. Article
  19. The contribution of HIV point-of-care tests in early HIV diagnosis: community-based HIV testing monitoring in Catalonia, 1995 to 2018.Euro surveillance : bulletin Europeen sur les maladies transmissibles = European communicable disease bulletin · 2020
    Article
  20. Article
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.

Sara CroxfordCentre for Infectious Disease Surveillance and Control, Public Health England, London, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0003-2220-623X
Zheng YinCentre for Infectious Disease Surveillance and Control, Public Health England, London, United Kingdom.
Fiona BurnsCentre for Population Research in Sexual Health and HIV, Institute of Global Health, University College London, London, United Kingdom.
Andrew CopasCentre for Population Research in Sexual Health and HIV, Institute of Global Health, University College London, London, United Kingdom.
Katy TownCentre for Infectious Disease Surveillance and Control, Public Health England, London, United Kingdom.
Sarika DesaiCentre for Infectious Disease Surveillance and Control, Public Health England, London, United Kingdom.
Andrew SkingsleyCentre for Infectious Disease Surveillance and Control, Public Health England, London, United Kingdom.
Valerie DelpechCentre for Infectious Disease Surveillance and Control, Public Health England, London, United Kingdom.
OptTEST project

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTimely linkage to care after HIV diagnosis is crucial as delayed access can result in poor patient outcomes. The aim of this systematic review was to synthesise the evidence to achieve a better understanding of what proportion of patients are linked to care and what factors impact linkage.

methodsSystematic searches were run in six databases up to the end of February 2017. The grey literature was also reviewed. Inclusion criteria were: sample size ≥50 people (aged ≥15), from the WHO European Region, published 2006-2017 and in English. Linkage to care was defined as a patient seen for HIV care after diagnosis. Study selection, data extraction and quality assurance were performed by two independent reviewers. Random-effects meta-analysis was carried out to summarise linkage to care within three months of diagnosis.

resultsTwenty-four studies were included; 22 presented linkage to care data and seven examined factors for linkage. Linkage among 89,006 people in 19 countries was captured. Meta-analysis, restricted to 12 studies and measuring prompt linkage within three months, gave a pooled estimate of 85% (95% CI: 75%-93%). Prompt linkage was higher in studies including only people in care (94%; 95% CI: 91%-97%) than in those of all new diagnoses (71%; 95% CI: 50%-87%). Heterogeneity was high across and within strata (>99%). Factors associated with delaying or not linking to care included: acquiring HIV through heterosexual contact/injecting drug use, younger age at diagnosis, lower levels of education, feeling well at diagnosis and diagnosis outside an STI clinic.

conclusionOverall, linkage to care was high, though estimates were lower in studies with a high proportion of people who inject drugs. The high heterogeneity between studies made it challenging to synthesise findings. Studies should adopt a standardised definition with a three month cut-off to measure prompt linkage to care to ensure comparability.

Indexed as

Time-to-TreatmentEuropeHIV InfectionsHumansWorld Health Organization

Identifiers

PMID29451875
PMCPMC5815583

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.