Trends in testing behaviours for hepatitis C virus infection and associated determinants: results from population‐based laboratory surveillance in Alberta, Canada (1998–2001)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Little is currently known about hepatitis C virus (HCV) test seeking behaviours at the population level. Given the centralized nature of testing for HCV infection in the province of Alberta, Canada, we had an opportunity to examine HCV testing behaviour at the population level on all newly diagnosed HCV-positive cases using laboratory data to validate the time and number of prior tests for each case. Record linkage identified 3323, 2937, 2660 and 2703 newly diagnosed cases of HCV infections in Alberta during 1998, 1999, 2000 and 2001, respectively, corresponding to age-adjusted rates of 149.8, 129, 114.3 and 113.7 per 100,000 population during these years, respectively. Results from secondary analyses of laboratory data suggest that the majority of HCV cases (95.3%) who were newly diagnosed between 1998 and 2001 were first-time testers for HCV infection. Among repeat testers, analysis of a negative test result within 1 year prior to a first of a positive test report suggests that 211 (38.4%) may be seroconvertors. These findings suggest that 339 or 61.7% of repeat testers may not have discovered their serostatus within 1 year of infection. Among this group, HCV testing was sought infrequently, with a median interval of 2.3 years between the last negative and first positive test. This finding is of concern given the risks for HCV transmission, particularly if risk-taking behaviours are not reduced because of unknown serostatus. These findings also reinforce the need to make the most of each test-seeking event with proper counselling and other appropriate support services.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".