Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33119195›Full record

ArticleJournal of the International AIDS Society2020

Comparison of effectiveness and cost for different HIV screening strategies implemented at large urban medical centre in the United States.

Britt Skaathun, Mai T Pho, Harold A Pollack, Samuel R Friedman, Moira C McNulty, Eleanor E Friedman, Jessica Schmitt, David Pitrak, John A Schneider

Registry-linked trialOpen access · goldAbstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of the International AIDS Society, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT07414459 (Combining Social Network Strategies and Routine Substance Use Screening), which is not on this map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.2field-weighted citation impact, top 36% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

NCT07414459 nanot yet recruitingnot on this mapstarted 2026, after this paper: background citation

Combining Social Network Strategies and Routine Substance Use Screening

TypeinterventionalSponsorUniversity of California, San DiegoRan2026 to 2029Enrolled500ConditionsHIV, Substance Use Disorder (SUD)ArmsSubstance use disorder screening, Social network intervention
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 13 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Britt SkaathunDepartment of Infectious Diseases and Global Public Health, University of California, San Diego, CA, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-8780-3612
Mai T PhoDepartment of Medicine, University of Chicago, Chicago, IL, USA.
Harold A PollackSchool of Social Service Administration, University of Chicago, Chicago, IL, USA.
Samuel R FriedmanDepartment of Population Health, New York University Medical School, New York, NY, USA.
Moira C McNultyChicago Center for HIV Elimination, Chicago, IL, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-9651-254X
Eleanor E FriedmanDepartment of Medicine, University of Chicago, Chicago, IL, USA.
Jessica SchmittDepartment of Medicine, University of Chicago, Chicago, IL, USA.
David PitrakDepartment of Medicine, University of Chicago, Chicago, IL, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-6663-2436
John A SchneiderDepartment of Public Health Sciences, University of Chicago, Chicago, IL, USA.
University of Chicago · USChicago Department of Public Health · USNew York University · US

Funding

Transdisciplinary Theoretical Svnthesis and Development CoreP30DA011041 · NIDA · NEW YORK UNIVERSITY · PI Holly Hagan, Courtney McKnight · 1998 to 2026
$38.9M
Virology and Immunology Technology CoreP30AI117943 · NIAID · NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY AT CHICAGO · PI Richard D'Aquila, Brian Mustanski · 2015 to 2026
$38.4M
HOPE Training GrantT32AI007384 · NIAID · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN DIEGO · PI Sara Gianella Weibel, Scott L Letendre · 1990 to 2026
$9.7M
The University of Chicago and Northwestern University Predoctoral Health Services Research Program-RenewalT32HS000084 · AHRQ · UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO · PI KONETZKA, RITA TAMARA, MELTZER, DAVID O · 1998 to 2024
$7.6M
Preventing HIV Transmission by Recently-Infected Drug UsersDP1DA034989 · NIDA · NATIONAL DEVELOPMENT AND RESEARCH INSTITUTES, INC. · PI FRIEDMAN, SAMUEL R · 2012 to 2016
$3.8M
Social Network Dynamics, HIV, and Risk Reduction Among Younger Black MSMR01DA033875 · NIDA · NATIONAL OPINION RESEARCH CENTER · PI SCHNEIDER, JOHN · 2012 to 2016
$3.0M
Modeling Structural HIV Determinants in Substance Users and related populationsR01DA037773 · NIDA · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN DIEGO · PI MARTIN, NATASHA, STRATHDEE, STEFFANIE A. · 2015 to 2017
$1.4M
Leveraging Networks, Epidemiology, and Epidemic Modeling: Creative Approaches for HIV EliminationK01DA049665 · NIDA · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN DIEGO · PI SKAATHUN, BRITT · 2019 to 2023
$947k
AHRQ HHS F32 HS000084AHRQ HHS T32 HS000084NIAID NIH HHS AI007384NIAID NIH HHS P30 AI117943NIAID NIH HHS T32 AI007384NIDA NIH HHS DA037773-01AINIDA NIH HHS DP1 DA034989NIDA NIH HHS DP1DA034989-01NIDA NIH HHS K01 DA049665NIDA NIH HHS P30 DA011041NIDA NIH HHS R01 DA033875NIDA NIH HHS R01 DA037773NIH HHS HS000084
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionIncident HIV infections persist in the United States (U.S.) among marginalized populations. Targeted and cost-efficient testing strategies can help in reaching HIV elimination. This analysis compares the effectiveness and cost of three HIV testing strategies in a high HIV burden area in the U.S. in identifying new HIV infections.

methodsWe performed a cost analysis comparing three HIV testing strategies in Chicago: (1) routine screening (RS) in an inpatient and outpatient setting, (2) modified partner services (MPS) among networks of the recently HIV infected and diagnosed, and (3) a respondent drive sampling (RDS)-based social network (SN) approach targeting young African-American men who have sex with men. All occurred at the same academic medical centre during the following times: routine testing, 2011 to 2016; MPS, 2013 to 2016; SN: 2013 to 2014. Costs were in 2016 dollars and included personnel, HIV testing, training, materials, overhead. Outcomes included cost per test, HIV-positive test and new diagnosis. Sensitivity analyses were performed to assess the impact of population demographics.

resultsThe RS programme completed 57,308 HIV tests resulting in 360 (0.6%) HIV-positive tests and 165 new HIV diagnoses (0.28%). The MPS completed 146 HIV tests, resulting in 79 (54%) HIV-positive tests and eight new HIV diagnoses (5%). The SN strategy completed 508 HIV tests, resulting in 210 (41%) HIV-positive tests and 37 new HIV diagnoses (7.2%). Labour accounted for the majority of costs in all strategies. The estimated cost per new HIV diagnosis was $16,773 for the RS programme, $61,418 for the MPS programme and $15,683 for the SN testing programme. These costs were reduced for the RS and MPS strategies in sensitivity analyses limiting testing efficacy to the highest prevalence patient populations ($2,841 and $33,233 respectively).

conclusionsThe SN strategy yielded the highest proportion of new diagnoses, followed closely by the MPS programme. Both the SN strategy and RS programme were comparable in the cost per new diagnosis. A simultaneous approach that consists of RS in combination with SN testing may be most effective for identifying new HIV infections in settings with heterogeneous epidemics with both high rates of HIV prevalence and HIV testing.

Indexed as

Academic Medical CentersHIV TestingAdultBlack or African AmericanChicagoCost-Benefit AnalysisFemaleHIV InfectionsHIV SeropositivityHomosexuality, MaleHumansMaleMass ScreeningSexual and Gender MinoritiesSocial NetworkingYoung AdultcostHIVscreeningsocial networksundiagnosed HIV infection

Identifiers

PMID33119195
PMCPMC7594703
OpenAlexW3094840179

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.