ArticleViruses2026
Potential Cost-Effectiveness of Machine Learning-Enabled Primary Care Identification of Hepatitis C Virus Patients in the US.
Article in Viruses, 2026. 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.
- Artificial Intelligence in Infectious Disease Care: Selected Applications in Tuberculosis, Sepsis, and Antimicrobial Stewardship.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Machine learning (ML) algorithms may be effective at improving the HCV care cascade. One ML algorithm, developed using U.S. ambulatory electronic medical records (EMR), demonstrated the ability to identify people infected with HCV earlier than conventional testing strategies among those with indications for screening. We evaluated the potential cost-effectiveness of ML-enabled screening for the early identification of undiagnosed HCV among people in care in the U.S. An HCV natural history Markov model was developed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of the ML algorithm-enabled screening compared to conventional testing over the training data period. Based on the training data, the ML algorithm identified patients on average 6.5 months earlier than conventional testing strategies. We compared the status quo to intervention scenarios using the ML algorithm at different recall levels (proportion of HCV patients identified, 5-100%). We identified the optimal algorithm recall level, which maximized health (measured in quality-adjusted life years, QALYs) while staying under a willingness-to-pay threshold of USD$100,000/QALY gained. ML-enabled screening was cost-effective (ICER < $100 k/QALY gained) in identifying undiagnosed HCV patients for recall levels up to 30%. The optimal recall level was 30% (Precision 0.27%), which resulted in a mean ICER of $94,022/QALY gained. ML-enabled screening for the early identification of undiagnosed HCV patients could be cost-effective in the U.S. Prospective evaluation of real-world effectiveness is warranted.
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.