ArticlePloS one2026
Four methods for estimating hepatitis C incidence using extant testing data.
Article in PloS one, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAccurate estimation of hepatitis C (HCV) incidence is crucial for measuring progress towards HCV elimination targets set by the World Health Organization (WHO). Extant HCV antibody (Ab) and RNA test results are widely used to estimate HCV incidence, but the impact of cohort specification and case definition on validity and generalizability is poorly understood.
methodsUsing databases linked at ICES - a repository of administrative health data for Ontario residents - we constructed a cohort of 15.8 million Ontarians aged 18-80 between 1999 and 2018 to estimate annual HCV incidence using four methods. The population-based method calculated HCV incidence as the number of new HCV diagnoses each year divided by annual population size estimates, while Poisson regression was used in the other three incidence estimation methods: the test-negative method defined eligibility at first negative test; the RNA-based method prioritized specificity by requiring RNA+ tests; and the antibody-inclusive method prioritized sensitivity by including all Ab+ tests.
resultsDistinct patterns of HCV incidence were found across the estimation methods: the RNA-based estimates were lowest and fluctuated around 30 cases per 100,000 person-years, while population-based and antibody-inclusive estimates were 1.5-fold higher, and test-negative estimates were 7.9-fold higher. Population-based estimates were sensitive to changes in the HCV case definition used in Ontario from 1999-2018. The test-negative cohort had a high prevalence of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) and substance use disorder, limiting generalizability of HCV incidence estimates. RNA-based estimates likely underestimated HCV incidence because 22% of Ab+ tests were unconfirmed by RNA testing, while antibody-inclusive estimates likely overestimated HCV incidence by assuming all unconfirmed Ab+ tests were true cases.
conclusionThese new findings illustrate the influence of cohort definition and HCV case definition when estimating HCV incidence using extant testing data, which will support accurate measurement of progress towards WHO HCV 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.