Observational studyThe American journal of managed care2018
Increasing hepatitis C screening in a large integrated health system: science and policy in concert.
Observational study in The American journal of managed care, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Hepatitis C Testing in the US Veterans Health Administration: Uptake of United States Preventive Services Taskforce Universal Hepatitis C Screening Guidance.Open forum infectious diseases · 2025Article
- Treating Hepatitis C in Individuals With Previous Incarceration: The Veterans Health Administration, 2012-2019.American journal of public health · 2023Article
- Cascade of Hepatitis C Virus Care Among Patients With Substance Use Disorders.American journal of preventive medicine · 2021Article
- Linkage to specialty care in the hepatitis C care cascade.Journal of investigative medicine : the official publication of the American Federation for Clinical Research · 2021Article
- Late diagnosis of hepatitis C virus infection, 2014-2016: continuing missed intervention opportunities.The American journal of managed care · 2019Article
- Economic Comparison of Serologic and Molecular Screening Strategies for Hepatitis C Virus.Gastroenterology & hepatology · 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
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesTo evaluate whether the updated 2013 US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) hepatitis C virus (HCV) screening recommendations, related Affordable Care Act provisions, and the impending availability of efficacious therapies were associated with increased screening in an integrated health system. STUDY
designWe analyzed 665,339 records of adult patients visiting Kaiser Permanente Mid-Atlantic States clinics from 2003 to 2014.
methodsWe used Cox proportional hazards to estimate time to HCV screening and confirmation after June 1, 2013, compared with prior.
resultsHCV screening steadily increased over time, but it jumped 29% (P <.01) from 2013 to 2014 versus 4% (P <.01) from 2012 to 2013. The adjusted hazard ratio for HCV screening since June 2013 was 2.40 (95% CI, 2.34-2.47) times higher than it was pre-intervention among the birth cohort (those born 1945-1965) and 2.00 (95% CI, 1.96-2.04) times higher in those born in other years, representing a 1.20-fold (95% CI, 1.17-1.24) greater increase in the screening rate among the birth cohort. We also identified variability in those thought to be at higher risk of HCV infection.
conclusionsHCV screening has been increasing in our healthcare system, more so since June 2013 and among the birth cohort. The availability of efficacious therapies and coverage policies coincident with the USPSTF recommendations may have facilitated access to screening and treatment in ways that were absent at the time of the 2012 CDC recommendations. Health systems must also be poised to make resources available to clinicians and patients in order to incentivize screening. Future research should inform a better understanding of incentives and barriers to screening and linkage to care from all stakeholder perspectives.
Indexed as
Identifiers
29851444PMC6132051W2975780287What 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.