Leveraging corona virus disease 2019 vaccination to promote hepatitis C screening
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Health care initiatives, such as hepatitis C virus (HCV) screening, have been greatly overshadowed by the corona virus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. However, COVID-19 vaccination programs also provide an opportunity to engage with a high volume of people in a health care setting. We collaborated with a large COVID vaccination center to offer HCV point-of-care testing followed by dried blood spot collection for HCV RNA. Additionally, this opportunity was used to evaluate the practical significance of a 5-minute version of the OraQuick HCV antibody test in lieu of the standard 20-minute test. We tested 2317 individuals; 31 were HCV antibody positive and six were RNA positive of which four were treated and reached sustained virological response. Over a third of those surveyed said they would not have participated had the test required 20 minutes. Conclusion : Colocalizing HCV testing and linkage to care at a COVID vaccination clinic was found to be highly feasible; furthermore, a shortened antibody test greatly improves the acceptance of testing.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".