BVA decisions by condition
Hepatitis c: BVA grant rates and what wins
From 2018 to 2026, the Board of Veterans' Appeals decided a hepatitis c issue in 1,020 decisions. It granted the hepatitis c issue in 11.9% of them, below the 19.9% grant rate for all conditions, denied it in 28.0%, and remanded it in 57.3%. Counting only decisions on the merits (granted or denied), 29.7% were granted.
Decisions
1,020
2018–2026
Granted
11.9%
All conditions: 19.9%
Granted on the merits
29.7%
Granted ÷ (granted + denied)
Remanded
57.3%
Denied: 28.0%
Hepatitis c outcomes by year
| Year | Decisions | Granted | Denied | Remanded |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2018 | 285 | 11.6% | 23.2% | 60.7% |
| 2019 | 181 | 13.8% | 29.3% | 55.8% |
| 2020 | 118 | 8.5% | 30.5% | 57.6% |
| 2021 | 119 | 10.1% | 34.5% | 53.8% |
| 2022 | 95 | 8.4% | 25.3% | 64.2% |
| 2023 | 86 | 8.1% | 23.3% | 62.8% |
| 2024 | 66 | 15.2% | 34.8% | 51.5% |
Evidence in granted and denied hepatitis c decisions
For each kind of supporting evidence: how often the Board granted the hepatitis c issue on the merits when the decision mentioned it, compared with decisions that did not. These are associations, not causes, and evidence is recorded per decision, not per issue.
| In the record | Decisions | Granted when present | When absent | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Positive nexus opinion | 204 | 61.1% | 17.7% | +43.4 pts |
| Private medical opinion | 337 | 47.2% | 18.5% | +28.6 pts |
| Favorable VA exam | 141 | 50.7% | 25.1% | +25.5 pts |
| Claimed as secondary | 78 | 53.1% | 27.7% | +25.4 pts |
| Combat service | 80 | 43.3% | 28.6% | +14.7 pts |
| Treating physician opinion | 58 | 40.7% | 28.9% | +11.8 pts |
| Lay statement | 877 | 28.7% | 37.5% | −8.8 pts |
- The Board applied the benefit-of-the-doubt rule (38 CFR 3.102) in 83.5% of the decisions that granted hepatitis c.
- The Board found the veteran's statements credible in 38.8% of grants and 11.2% of denials.
Negative evidence in the record
An unfavorable exam or a negative nexus opinion often sits in the same record as favorable evidence, and the Board weighs them against each other. So these rows show how often hepatitis c was still granted when the record contained the negative item, not that the item helped.
| In the record | Decisions | Granted when present | When absent | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Negative nexus opinion | 566 | 28.1% | 33.1% | −5.0 pts |
| Unfavorable VA exam | 741 | 28.9% | 34.4% | −5.5 pts |
Why the Board granted or denied hepatitis c
Most common reasons in grants
- Current diagnosis established11
- Caused by the service-connected disability4
- VA examiner: less likely than not related to service3
- Service connection established2
- Criteria for service connection met2
- Conflicting medical opinions regarding service connection2
Most common reasons in denials
- VA examiner: less likely than not related to service40
- Preponderance of the evidence against the claim37
- No in-service complaints, treatment or diagnosis33
- No current diagnosis22
- Service records negative or silent13
- Criteria for service connection not met6
- Current diagnosis established4
- No new and material evidence received2
Numbers are decisions that gave the reason. Reasons are short phrases extracted by AI from each decision; common wordings of the same reason are grouped. Benefit of the doubt is reported above.
Recent hepatitis c decisions
Granted
Resolving reasonable doubt in favor of the Veteran; Criteria for service connection met; Evidence in approximate balance
Benefit of the doubt afforded; Symptoms indicative of 40% rating; Sustained weight loss noted
In-service diagnosis and treatment of hepatitis; Veteran's consistent lay statements of exposure and symptoms; Private medical opinions linking hepatitis C to in-service hepatitis; Equipoise in evidence resolved in veteran's favor
Denied
No evidence of onset during service; No adequate medical opinion linking to service; Chiropractor opinion found inadequate due to factual inaccuracies
In-service sexually transmitted infection documented.; Found to be sufficient to document in-service exposure to Hepatitis C.; Reasonable doubt resolved in veteran's favor regarding etiology.
Symptoms duplicative of cirrhosis of the liver; Overlapping symptoms with 100% rated cirrhosis; Benefit of the doubt not applicable
Rules that apply to hepatitis c claims
- 38 CFR 3.303
Principles of service connection
Read it in VA Law Explorer - 38 CFR 3.310
Secondary service connection and aggravation
Read it in VA Law Explorer - 38 CFR 3.102
Reasonable doubt (benefit of the doubt)
Read it in VA Law Explorer
Research your hepatitis c case
Narrow by year, judge, evidence or secondary condition, read the decisions, and export a research memo.
How these numbers are calculated
- Rates count decisions in which the Board decided a hepatitis c issue, by the outcome of that issue. Other issues in the same decision can have different outcomes.
- “Granted on the merits” leaves out remands and dismissals. “All conditions” is the grant share across every condition issue in the data.
- The data comes from CaseScribe's AI extraction of public BVA decisions (2018–2026) and can contain errors. It is updated automatically as new decisions are added.