Observational studyThe Journal of emergency medicine2026
Targeting Where the Burden is: Evaluating California's Emergency Department Screening Program Against Human Immunodeficiency Virus Epidemic Priorities.
Observational study in The Journal of emergency medicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe federal Ending the Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV) Epidemic (EHE) initiative emphasizes targeted efforts in "priority" jurisdictions to reduce new infections through earlier diagnosis and treatment. In California, the Emergency Department Screening Program (EDSP) was recently implemented to expand HIV and sexually transmitted infection (STI) testing in emergency departments (EDs)-key access points for underserved populations.
objectiveTo evaluate whether EDSP funding allocation aligns with EHE geographic and demographic priorities, and to identify opportunities to optimize ED-based HIV screening strategies.
methodsWe conducted an observational, retrospective analysis of California EDs using publicly available data; ED ZIP codes were used to stratify EDs by their funding status and priority county designation and to link them to corresponding county-level Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) data on population-adjusted estimates of HIV, syphilis, gonorrhea, and chlamydia.
resultsOf the 313 EDs analyzed, 27 (8.6%) received EDSP funding. Funded EDs were more often teaching hospitals and served higher proportions of patients who were homeless, Hispanic or Latino, Black or African American, or insured through Medi-Cal (all p < 0.01). Nearly all (90%) statewide ED visits occurred in nonfunded hospitals. Although median population-adjusted STI and HIV rates were similar by funding status, nonfunded EDs in priority counties had higher HIV prevalence than funded EDs in nonpriority counties (p < 0.001). Only a minority of the highest-burden EDs received EDSP funding.
conclusionWhile EDSP-funded EDs effectively reach populations at elevated risk for HIV, allocation did not consistently align with CDC-designated priority counties or areas of highest HIV burden. Future statewide funding strategies should prioritize high-burden jurisdictions while maintaining flexibility to support nonpriority areas with demonstrated need.
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.