ArticlePloS one2020
The balancing perspective of hard-to-reach hepatitis C patients who were lost to follow-up: A qualitative study.
Article in PloS one, 2020. 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.
- Exploring the value and acceptability of a patient navigator program for people who inject drugs and are hospitalized for bacterial infections: patients', community organization and healthcare workers' perspectives.BMC infectious diseases · 2025Article
- Assessing feasibility of a modified same-day test-and-treat model for hepatitis C among rural people who inject drugs.Harm reduction journal · 2023Article
- Barriers to scaling up hepatitis C treatment in Malaysia: a qualitative study with key stakeholders.BMC public health · 2022Article
- Impact of an Accelerated Pretreatment Evaluation on Linkage-to-Care for Hepatitis C-infected Persons Who Inject Drugs.Substance abuse : research and treatment · 2022Article
- Retrieval of lost patients in the system for hepatitis C microelimination: a single-center retrospective study.BMC gastroenterology · 2021Article
- The Application of Australian Rights Protections to the Use of Hepatitis C Notification Data to Engage People 'Lost to Follow Up'.Public health ethicsArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIn the foreseeable future, patients with hepatitis C virus (HCV) with good healthcare access will all have been cured and the lost to follow-up (LFU) HCV-population will increasingly exist of hard-to-reach patients. Efforts to retrieve these individuals with HCV have been moderately successful so far. A deeper understanding of the reasons for loss to follow-up and the underlying processes is lacking.
aimsTo explore reasons for previous loss to follow-up in patients with HCV who have been brought back into care.
methodsIn 2017, fifteen patients with HCV who were evaluated at the University Medical Center Utrecht (UMCU) Infectious diseases outpatient clinic as part of the "REtrieval And cure of Chronic Hepatitis C" (REACH)-project were included in this study through convenience sampling. Face-to-face semi-structured in-depth interviews were conducted and a qualitative analysis based on the grounded theory was applied.
resultsA basic socio- psychological process named "maintaining the achieved balance" was uncovered in patients with HCV who were LFU. This "achieved balance" is the result of a transformative process following the initial HCV diagnosis. It is a steadfast stance in which participants keep HCV out of sight and in the margin of their lives in order to reestablish an optimal state of well-being. The balancing perspective is subsequently defended by repeated evasive behavioral patterns to avoid confrontation with the disease.
conclusionThe balancing perspective gives insight into why individuals with HCV were not retained in care but also why they remained LFU thereafter. Physicians should realize that this mindset can be persistent and repeated efforts may be needed to finally trace and retrieve these patients.
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.