ArticlePloS one2026
Integration of HIV, Hepatitis B, and C, and sexually transmitted infections services: A scoping review of the benefits and challenges.
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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIntegrating clinical programs and services is a cost-effective approach that can improve health and system outcomes. This review aimed to provide an overview of the benefits and challenges of integrated programs for HIV, hepatitis B and C, and STI services worldwide and provide recommendations for research and practice.
methodsThis scoping review followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR) guidelines. We searched electronic databases PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science until May 2025 to extract relevant studies. Additionally, we reviewed reputable grey literature sources, such as WHO and UNAIDS, and references from included publications for further relevant articles. Studies that had eligible criteria were included. We applied a narrative approach to report the findings through an inductive approach.
resultsOut of 19,516 initially identified studies, 118 were selected. The benefits and challenges of integration were classified into six categories: integrated service delivery, medical information and technology, human resources, health outcomes, collaboration and partnerships, and financial/physical resources. The significant benefits of these classifications include improved health outcomes, cost-effectiveness, enhanced efficiency, prevention of transmission, use of comprehensive care, reduction of time for receiving necessary services, increased knowledge and awareness, and improved cooperation. However, integration has some challenges, including the need for sufficient infrastructure, budget, human resources, and the potential for increased stress and work pressure on employees.
conclusionsPrioritizing health is key to national development, requiring policies and resources for cost-effective patient and community benefits. This scoping review highlights the feasibility and advantages of integrating services for HIV, hepatitis B and C, and STIs. Our findings strongly support policymakers in prioritizing the planning and implementation of these integrated programs. An evidence-informed integration framework is needed to guide these actions effectively.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.