↓ Skip to main content

Patterns and Gaps Identified in a Systematic Review of the Hepatitis C Virus Care Continuum in Studies among People Who Use Drugs

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Public Health, December 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
16 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
20 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Patterns and Gaps Identified in a Systematic Review of the Hepatitis C Virus Care Continuum in Studies among People Who Use Drugs
Published in
Frontiers in Public Health, December 2017
DOI 10.3389/fpubh.2017.00348
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ashly E. Jordan, David C. Perlman, Jennifer Reed, Daniel J. Smith, Holly Hagan

Abstract

Systematic reviews are useful for synthesizing data on various health conditions and for identifying gaps in available data. In the US, the main risk group for hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection is people who use drugs (PWUD); as a group, PWUD have the highest prevalence of chronic HCV. While the care continuum construct has been increasingly applied to studies of HCV care among PWUD, what constitutes the steps in an HCV care continuum is not standardized. We sought to examine the range of HCV care continuum outcomes that studies reported on, to identify gaps in the literature, and to develop strategies that allowed for valuable syntheses of care continuum data. We conducted searches of electronic databases for published literature. Reports were eligible if they provided original data from 1990 to 2016 from the US, presented data on one or more HCV care continuum outcomes, and provided outcome data on PWUD as a distinct group. A total of 313 full-text reports were assessed for eligibility. Of 212 potentially eligible reports, 32 (15.1%) did not present outcomes for PWUD separately from those who were non-PWUD. Among 101 eligible reports, a total of 166 care continuum outcomes were extracted; outcomes could be grouped into three categories that represent the HCV care continuum: testing (39.8%, n = 66/166); linkage to care (16.9%, n = 28/166); and treatment (43.4%, n = 72/166). Seventy-four reports (73.3%, n = 74/101) presented data on only one step. Linkage to care occurred variably after only antibody, or after antibody and viral load (VL) testing. Six (5.9%, n = 6/101) reports presented data on all three steps. Reports examined a variety of HCV care continuum outcomes that could be grouped into the three steps of testing, linkage to care, and treatment. The application of this care continuum model would facilitate subsequent data synthesis for program comparison and public health evaluation. Given the two-step nature of HCV testing, analyses also need to account for variation in whether linkage to care occurred after antibody testing or after sequential antibody and VL testing. Additional data are needed on the progression of PWUD through the entire care continuum.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 20 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 20 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 4 20%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 15%
Student > Bachelor 2 10%
Student > Postgraduate 2 10%
Student > Master 2 10%
Other 2 10%
Unknown 5 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 6 30%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 10%
Immunology and Microbiology 2 10%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 10%
Arts and Humanities 1 5%
Other 2 10%
Unknown 5 25%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 18 January 2018.
All research outputs
#17,667,907
of 22,681,577 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Public Health
#4,805
of 9,607 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#306,193
of 438,108 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Public Health
#64
of 90 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,681,577 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 9,607 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.9. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 438,108 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 90 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.