ReviewCurrent opinion in gastroenterology2019
Population-based screening of hepatitis C virus in the United States.
Review in Current opinion in gastroenterology, 2019. 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.
- 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
- Screening for Hepatitis C Among Community Health Center Patients by Ethnicity and Language Preference.AJPM focus · 2023Article
- Vital Signs: Newly Reported Acute and Chronic Hepatitis C Cases - United States, 2009-2018.MMWR. Morbidity and mortality weekly report · 2020Article
- Assessing the Effectiveness of Strategies in US Birth Cohort Screening for Hepatitis C Infection.Journal of clinical and translational hepatology · 2020Review
- Late diagnosis of hepatitis C virus infection, 2014-2016: continuing missed intervention opportunities.The American journal of managed care · 2019Article
- Universal HCV Screening of Baby Boomers is Feasible, but It is Difficult.Journal of clinical and experimental hepatologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purpose of reviewThis review summarized the recent evidence on the performance of population-based hepatitis C virus (HCV) screening, published and indexed to PubMed, in the Unite States during the 2-year window from 1 January 2017 to 31 December 2018. RECENT
findingsA majority of the selected articles in this review focused on the birth cohort 1945-1965 because of the HCV screening recommendations released after August 2012. However, the articles for the high-risk population applied to all ages because the recommendations for this specific population have remained largely unchanged since 1998. The reported rates of HCV screening varied substantially not only across the three different populations (i.e. general, underserved, and high-risk) but also within each population. SUMMARY: More vigilant monitoring of HCV screening performance of younger birth cohorts is needed as these individuals have been experiencing a higher incidence of HCV infection than those in the birth cohort 1945-1965. In addition, to meet the goal of eliminating HCV infection as a US public health problem by 2030, significant improvement in more accurately and comprehensively reporting the trends in population-based HCV screening across different populations is warranted in the future.
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.