ArticleInternal medicine journal2025
Acceptability of automatic screening for viral hepatitis in an emergency department setting: patient and healthcare worker perspectives.
Article in Internal medicine journal, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Viral hepatitis detection through emergency hospital departments in a Spanish region with high immigration: implications for elimination strategies.Infectious diseases of poverty · 2026Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundScreening for viral hepatitis by automatically ordering hepatitis B and C serology on blood samples already collected from patients presenting to the emergency department (ED) is a relatively novel concept, with modest costs involved.
aimThe aim of this study was to determine patient and healthcare worker perspectives of automatic hepatitis screening at a large metropolitan hospital in Sydney, Australia.
methodsIn this cross-sectional survey study, patients admitted via ED and ED healthcare workers (HCWs) were invited to participate. The primary outcome was the level of patient and HCW acceptability of an automatic hepatitis screening process. Secondary outcomes were patient and HCW knowledge of viral hepatitis, perceptions and barriers to ED hepatitis screening in the absence of an automatic process.
resultsNinety-two percent of 273 patients who participated in the survey wished to know their viral hepatitis status, and 82% found automatic hepatitis B and C testing acceptable as part of their ED blood work. HCWs surveyed (48) believed this strategy would increase testing, as most did not routinely interrogate patients for risk factors or other eligibility criteria for hepatitis testing, as the presenting ED complaint was their priority. Even when indications for testing based on current guidelines were present, few (32%) HCWs initiated testing.
conclusionAutomatic viral hepatitis testing in ED is supported by the majority of patients and HCWs, and the latter believe it would increase testing rates. Increasing identification of patients with hepatitis, if accompanied by effective linkage to care, could facilitate World Health Organization elimination goals.
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.