ArticleThe British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners1999
Postal urine specimens: are they a feasible method for genital chlamydial infection screening?
Article in The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners, 1999. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
15 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Chlamydia trachomatis in the United Kingdom: a systematic review and analysis of prevalence studies.Sexually transmitted infections · 2004Pooled it
- Can we evaluate population screening strategies in UK general practice? A pilot randomised controlled trial comparing postal and opportunistic screening for genital chlamydial infection.Journal of epidemiology and community health · 2005Trial
- The chlamydia screening studies: rationale and design.Sexually transmitted infections · 2004Trial
- Delivery of chlamydia screening to young women requesting emergency hormonal contraception at pharmacies in Manchester, UK: a prospective study.BMC women's health · 2009Article
- Opportunistic and systematic screening for chlamydia: a study of consultations by young adults in general practice.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2006Article
- Monitoring STI prevalence using telephone surveys and mailed urine specimens: a pilot test.Sexually transmitted infections · 2005Article
- Coverage and uptake of systematic postal screening for genital Chlamydia trachomatis and prevalence of infection in the United Kingdom general population: cross sectional study.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2005Article
- The value of home-based collection of biospecimens in reproductive epidemiology.Environmental health perspectives · 2004Review
- Repeat chlamydia screening by mail, San Francisco.Sexually transmitted infections · 2003Article
- Follow-up, treatment, and reinfection rates among asymptomatic chlamydia trachomatis cases in general practice.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2002Article
- The acceptability of urinary LCR testing for Chlamydia trachomatis among participants in a probability sample survey of sexual attitudes and lifestyles.Sexually transmitted infections · 2001Article
- The prevalence of Chlamydia trachomatis infection in male undergraduates: a postal survey.Sexually transmitted infections · 2001Article
- Evidence is not (yet) enough for evidence based policy for chlamydia screening.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2001Article
- Low diagnostic accuracy of selective screening criteria for asymptomatic Chlamydia trachomatis infections in the general population.Sexually transmitted infections · 2000Article
- Chlamydia screening can have high take-up rates if right methodology is used.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 1999Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundA United Kingdom (UK) screening programme for Chlamydia trachomatis has recently been announced. Pilot projects involving the opportunistic testing of women attending health facilities are due to commence in several sites. There is a danger that this approach will fail to obtain adequate population coverage. The alternative--true systematic population screening--is generally assumed to be unfeasible. Studies in Denmark using postal urine specimens have challenged this assumption. No such studies have been reported from the UK.
aimTo assess the potential of urine specimens sent by post as the basis for a UK population screening strategy for genital chlamydial infection.
methodTwo hundred patients (100 men, 100 women) aged 18 to 45 years were randomly sampled from the list of one urban group practice. Subjects were mailed an explanatory letter, a urine sample container, a sexual lifestyle questionnaire, and a prepaid return envelope. Non-responders were contacted by telephone; persistent non-responders were visited at home. Samples were tested for Chlamydia by DNA amplification and enzyme immunoassay.
resultsSixty-four (32%) subjects were no longer living at their GP registered address. Of the remaining 136, 126 (93%) responded to the survey and 113 (83%) accepted the request for a urine sample and completed a questionnaire. Acceptance rates were similar for men and women and across age groups. Four samples (3%) were Chlamydia positive.
conclusionHome mailed urine specimen collection in conjunction with a self-completed postal questionnaire is feasible. This could provide a viable basis both for determining population Chlamydia prevalence and for a UK Chlamydia population screening strategy. Overall cost effectiveness of such a strategy will depend on the cost of the test used. Comparative performance characteristics of the different currently available tests in this setting have yet to be fully determined.
Indexed as
Identifiers
10562745PMC1313443What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.