Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36777404›Full record

ArticleLancet regional health. Americas2021

The Cooperative Re-Engagement Controlled trial (CoRECT): A randomised trial to assess a collaborative data to care model to improve HIV care continuum outcomes.

Robyn Neblett Fanfair, George Khalil, Tiffany Williams, Kathleen Brady, Alfred DeMaria, Merceditas Villanueva, Liisa M Randall, Heidi Jenkins, Frederick L Altice, Nasima Camp and 4 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Lancet regional health. Americas, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

16 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Observational
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. 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

14 authors.

Robyn Neblett FanfairDivision of HIV/AIDS Prevention, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, GA, United States.
George KhalilDivision of HIV/AIDS Prevention, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, GA, United States.
Tiffany WilliamsDivision of HIV/AIDS Prevention, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, GA, United States.
Kathleen BradyPhiladelphia Department of Public Health, Philadelphia, PA, United States.
Alfred DeMariaBureau of Infectious Disease and Laboratory Sciences, Massachusetts Department of Public Health, Boston, MA, United States.
Merceditas VillanuevaYale University School of Medicine, New Haven, CT, United States.
Liisa M RandallBureau of Infectious Disease and Laboratory Sciences, Massachusetts Department of Public Health, Boston, MA, United States.
Heidi JenkinsConnecticut Department of Public Health, Hartford, CT, United States.
Frederick L AlticeYale University School of Medicine, New Haven, CT, United States.
Nasima CampDivision of HIV/AIDS Prevention, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, GA, United States.
Crystal LucasPhiladelphia Department of Public Health, Philadelphia, PA, United States.
Marianne BuchelliConnecticut Department of Public Health, Hartford, CT, United States.
Taraz SamandariDivision of HIV/AIDS Prevention, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, GA, United States.
Paul J WeidleDivision of HIV/AIDS Prevention, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, GA, United States.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Persons with HIV (PWH), aware of their HIV infection but not in care account for an estimated 42.6% of HIV transmissions in the United States. Health departments and clinics implemented a collaborative data-to-care strategy to identify persons newly out-of-care with the objective of increasing re-engagement, retention in medical care, and viral load suppression. Methods: A multi-site, prospective randomised trial was conducted to identify newly out-of-care PWH using surveillance and clinic data in Connecticut (CT), Massachusetts (MA) and Philadelphia (PHL). All out-of-care participants were randomised to receive standard of care or an active public health intervention. Re-engagement in care was defined as having a documented CD4 count and/or HIV viral load within 90 days of randomization. Retention was defined as having at least two CD4 count and/or HIV viral load results ≥ 3 months apart within 12 months of randomization, and viral load suppression as having a viral load < 200 copies/ml within 12 months of randomization. Findings: Between August 2016 and July 2018, 1893 out-of-care participants were randomised from CT ( Interpretation: This trial showed that a collaborative, data-to-care strategy, and active public health intervention led by health departments significantly increases the proportion of PWH re-engaged in HIV care and may improve retention in care and decrease time to viral suppression.

Indexed as

Data to CareHealth Department InterventionsHIV/AIDSRandomized TrialRe-engagement in care

Identifiers

PMID36777404
PMCPMC9903939

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.