Observational studyMedicine2020
Towards ending the human immunodeficiency virus epidemic in the US: State of human immunodeficiency virus screening during physician and emergency department visits, 2009 to 2014.
Observational study in Medicine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Differences in emergency department visit characteristics and resource utilization for persons with human immunodeficiency virus, 2018-2019 compared with 2009-2010.BMC emergency medicine · 2025Article
- Detection and quantification of human immunodeficiency virus-1 (HIV-1) total nucleic acids in wastewater settled solids from two California communities.Applied and environmental microbiology · 2024Article
- Implementing a Rapid Antiretroviral Therapy Program Using Starter Packs for Emergency Department Patients Diagnosed With HIV Infection.Open forum infectious diseases · 2023Article
- Characteristics of California Emergency Departments in Centers for Disease Control and Prevention-Designated HIV Priority Counties.The Journal of emergency medicine · 2023Article
- A 45-year-old Female with an Atypical Presentation of Pharyngitis.Clinical practice and cases in emergency medicine · 2020Article
- Provider Perspectives on Barriers to Routine HIV Testing of Adolescent and Young Adult Patients in Emergency Department Settings.Behavioral medicine (Washington, D.C.)Article
- 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
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) testing is important for prevention and treatment. Ending the HIV epidemic is unattainable if significant proportions of people living with HIV remain undiagnosed, making HIV testing critical for prevention and treatment. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) recommends routine HIV testing for persons aged 13 to 64 years in all health care settings. This study builds on prior research by estimating the extent to which HIV testing occurs during physician office and emergency department (ED) post 2006 CDC recommendations.We performed an unweighted and weighted cross-sectional analysis using pooled data from 2 nationally representative surveys namely National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey and National Hospital Ambulatory Medical Care Survey from 2009 to 2014. We assessed routine HIV testing trends and predictive factors in physician offices and ED using multi-stage statistical survey procedures in SAS 9.4.HIV testing rates in physician offices increased by 105% (5.6-11.5 per 1000) over the study period. A steeper increase was observed in ED with a 191% (2.3-6.7 per 1000) increase. Odds ratio (OR) for HIV testing in physician offices were highest among ages 20 to 29 ([OR] 7.20, 99% confidence interval [CI: 4.37-11.85]), males (OR 1.34, [CI: 0.91-0.93]), African-Americans (OR 2.97, [CI: 2.05-4.31]), Hispanics (OR 1.80, [CI: 1.17-2.78]), and among visits occurring in the South (OR 2.06, [CI: 1.23-3.44]). In the ED, similar trends of higher testing odds persisted for African Americans (OR 3.44, 99% CI 2.50-4.73), Hispanics (OR 2.23, 99% CI 1.65-3.01), and Northeast (OR 2.24, 99% CI 1.10-4.54).While progress has been made in screening, HIV testing rates remains sub-optimal for ED visits. Populations visiting the ED for routine care may suffer missed opportunities for HIV testing, which delays their entry into HIV medical care. To end the epidemic, new approaches for increasing targeted routine HIV testing for populations attending health care settings is recommended.
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.