ReviewThe lancet. HIV2022
Implied consent for HIV testing in the UK: time for a new approach?
Review in The lancet. HIV, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Blood-borne virus testing in European emergency departments: current evidence and service considerations.European journal of public health · 2025Pooled it
- An overview of consent requirements for HIV and viral hepatitis B and C testing in Europe.HIV medicine · 2026Article
- Staff perspectives on implementing opt-out blood-borne virus testing in English emergency departments: a qualitative study.Emergency medicine journal : EMJ · 2026Article
- HIV-Indicator Condition Guided Testing in a Hospital Setting.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
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
Abstract
Despite HIV infection being a treatable chronic illness and the many advances in testing for HIV, late diagnosis is still common, with associated avoidable morbidity and mortality. Requirements for explicit consent for HIV testing in the UK differ from those for other blood tests and are major barriers to testing. We argue that the disparity is illogical and outdated. We propose a model for normalising HIV testing that allows for routine testing in various health-care settings via implied consent, where other blood tests are performed. Inclusion of testing for hepatitis B and hepatitis C might also be incorporated into this model. The ethical argument for this approach is principally beneficence towards people with undiagnosed infection and the people they might infect. Patient autonomy would be maintained using systems allowing for individuals to opt out of implied consent.
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.