ArticleOpen forum infectious diseases2018
Missed Opportunities for HIV Testing of Patients Tested for Sexually Transmitted Infections at a Large Urban Health Care System From 2010 to 2015.
Article in Open forum infectious diseases, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Missed opportunities for HIV testing among those who accessed sexually transmitted infection (STI) services, tested for STIs and diagnosed with STIs: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Journal of the International AIDS Society · 2023Pooled it
- Assessing Gaps in Integrated HIV and STI Testing Among New York State-Funded Providers by Pre-exposure Prophylaxis Status: Implications for Status-Neutral Programming.Journal of acquired immune deficiency syndromes (1999) · 2025Article
- HIV testing in a high prevalence urban area in the US: Identifying missed opportunities two ways.International journal of STD & AIDS · 2022Article
- Social Media Use and HIV Screening Uptake Among Deaf Adults in the United States: Cross-Sectional Survey Study.JMIR public health and surveillance · 2019Article
- Missed opportunities for HIV testing in people diagnosed with HIV, Estonia, 2014 to 2015.Euro surveillance : bulletin Europeen sur les maladies transmissibles = European communicable disease bulletin · 2019Observational
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
backgroundAppropriate testing of people at risk for HIV is an important piece of the HIV care continuum. We analyzed HIV testing patterns of patients tested for gonorrhea and chlamydia (GC/CT) at a large urban health care system in New York City.
methodsWe retrospectively studied HIV and GC/CT testing from 2010 to 2015. Data were collected from a clinical laboratory database and linked to electronic health records. Patients were older than age 13 years, not known to be HIV positive, and had had a GC/CT test. The main outcome was the proportion of patients who had both HIV and GC/CT testing performed at the same encounter.
resultsWe analyzed 85 768 patients with 139 404 GC/CT testing encounters. Most of the testing encounters (88% for men and 94% for women) were in the outpatient setting. Same-day HIV testing improved from 59% in 2010 to 70% in 2015 for male patients, and from 41% to 51% for female patients. In multivariate regression, male sex was associated with receipt of an HIV test (odds ratio [OR], 2.49;
conclusionsConcurrent HIV testing of patients being evaluated for GC/CT increased from 2010 to 2015. However, many patients failed to receive HIV testing, especially in emergency and inpatient settings. There continue to be missed opportunities for diagnosis of HIV among individuals with ongoing high-risk behavior.
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.