Recommendations for the Identification of Hepatitis C Virus Infection among Persons Born from 1945 through 1965

Title: Recommendations for the Identification of Hepatitis C Virus (HCV) Infection among Persons Born from 1945 through 1965

Subject of Planned Report: Screening for Hepatitis C Virus among Persons Born from 1945 through 1965

Purpose of Planned Report: To expand previous recommendations for the prevention and control of hepatitis C virus infection; to systematically review the scientific literature on hepatitis C screening and assess the quality of the evidence using GRADE methodology.

Type of Dissemination: Influential Scientific Information

Timing of Review: October 31, 2011 – November 12, 2011

Type of Review: Individual

Opportunities for the Public to Comment: Public comment period anticipated in May 2012

Peer Reviewers Provided with Public Comments before the Review: No

Anticipated Number of Reviewers: 3

Primary Disciplines or Expertise: Hepatology, Gastroenterology, Guideline Methodology

Reviewers Selected by: CDC/Division of Viral Hepatitis (DVH)

Public Nominations Requested for Reviewers: No

Charge to Peer Reviewers: The document that you will review, Recommendations for the Identification of Hepatitis C Virus (HCV) Infection among Persons Born from 1945 through 1965, is a single set of recommendations supported by evidence. We are requesting your review of the body of literature used to draw conclusions about a routine, one-time HCV screening for persons in this birth cohort. As you review the Background, Methods, and Results sections, we would appreciate your thoughts as to whether any key studies have been left out or, in your opinion, misinterpreted as well as comments on the appropriateness of the conclusions. Above all, we are interested in your thoughts about the determinations regarding the quality of the evidence and the strength of the recommendations that were drawn. We will provide a guide to help you navigate to the relevant sections of the document and to collect and organize your responses. After we review your comments, they will be posted without attribution along with our responses on this page at a later date.

Specific questions in the template include:

1. Are there omissions of information or key studies that are critical for the intended audience of clinicians and community health workers? If so, what should be included?
2. Have we included inappropriate information? If so, what should be removed?
3. Do you have concerns about technical or factual accuracy? If so, please explain.
4. Are the recommendations appropriately drawn from the evidence presented? Please explain.
5. Is this document clear and comprehensible to a lay audience? If not, which sections should be reviewed?
6. Other comments you might have?

Peer Reviewers

1. Lok, Anna S.
   Academic and Professional Credentials: M.D., F.R.C.P.
   Current Position Title: Professor, Department of Internal Medicine
   Organizational Affiliation: University of Michigan
   Areas of Expertise, Discipline, Relevant Experiences: Hepatology; liver disease, hepatitis B and hepatitis C, liver transplantation, cirrhosis
   Recommended by: DVH
2. Hagan, Holly
   Academic and Professional Credentials: Ph.D.
   Current Position Title: Director, Interdisciplinary Research Methods Core, Center for Drug Use and HIV Research; Principal Investigator
   Organizational Affiliation: New York University, College of Nursing
   Areas of Expertise, Discipline, Relevant Experiences: Epidemiology; HCV epidemiology and HCV prevention in IDUs and NIDUs
   Recommended by: DVH
3. Kinsinger, Linda
   Academic and Professional Credentials: M.D., M.P.H.
   Current Position Title: Director, National Center for Health Promotion and Disease
   Organizational Affiliation: Veterans Health Administration
   Areas of Expertise, Discipline, Relevant Experiences: Internal Medicine, Preventive Medicine
   Recommended by: DVH

Additional Documents

Response to Peer Reviewer Comments [PDF - 8 pages], February 10, 2012