ArticleSexually transmitted infections2001
Cost effectiveness analysis of a population based screening programme for asymptomatic Chlamydia trachomatis infections in women by means of home obtained urine specimens.
Article in Sexually transmitted infections, 2001. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 4 of them syntheses 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
16 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 70 citations in OpenAlex.
- Evaluation of Chlamydia trachomatis screening from the perspective of health economics: a systematic review.Frontiers in public health · 2023Pooled it
- One to one interventions to reduce sexually transmitted infections and under the age of 18 conceptions: a systematic review of the economic evaluations.Sexually transmitted infections · 2007Pooled it
- Screening for Chlamydia trachomatis: a systematic review of the economic evaluations and modelling.Sexually transmitted infections · 2006Pooled it
- Adherence of pharmacoeconomic studies to national guidelines in the Netherlands.Pharmacy world & science : PWS · 2005Pooled it
- The economic impact of project MARS (motivating adolescents to reduce sexual risk).Health psychology : official journal of the Division of Health Psychology, American Psychological Association · 2013Trial
- 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
- Self care interventions for sexual and reproductive health and rights: costs, benefits, and financing.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2019Article
- Screening for Sexually Transmitted Infections in Antenatal Care Is Especially Important Among HIV-Infected Women.Sexually transmitted diseases · 2015Article
- Development and Evaluation of GIS-Based Chlamydia Trachomatis Intervention Policy in Illinois.Online journal of public health informatics · 2009Article
- Cost-effectiveness of screening strategies for Chlamydia trachomatis using cervical swabs, urine, and self-obtained vaginal swabs in a sexually transmitted disease clinic setting.Sexually transmitted diseases · 2008Article
- Healthcare and patient costs of a proactive chlamydia screening programme: the Chlamydia Screening Studies project.Sexually transmitted infections · 2007Article
- Chlamydia trachomatis load at matched anatomic sites: implications for screening strategies.Journal of clinical microbiology · 2007Article
- Testing for sexually transmitted infections: a brave new world?Sexually transmitted infections · 2006Article
- Chlamydia trachomatis in female sex workers in Belgium: 1998-2003.Sexually transmitted infections · 2005Article
- Prevalence of urogenital Chlamydia trachomatis increases significantly with level of urbanisation and suggests targeted screening approaches: results from the first national population based study in the Netherlands.Sexually transmitted infections · 2005Article
- Evaluation of the Digene Hybrid Capture II Assay with the Rapid Capture System for detection of Chlamydia trachomatis and Neisseria gonorrhoeae.Journal of clinical microbiology · 2002Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo evaluate the cost effectiveness of a systematic screening programme for asymptomatic Chlamydia trachomatis infections in a female inner city population. To determine the sensitivity of the cost effectiveness analysis to variation in the probability of developing sequelae.
methodsA decision tree was constructed to evaluate health effects of the programme, such as averted sequelae of chlamydial infection. Cost effectiveness from a societal perspective was estimated for screening by means of a ligase chain reaction on mailed, home obtained urine specimens, in a population with a C trachomatis test prevalence of 2.9%. An extensive sensitivity analysis was performed for the probability of sequelae, the percentage of preventable pelvic inflammatory disease (PID), and the discount rate.
resultsThe estimated net cost of curing one woman, aged 15-40 years, of a C trachomatis infection is US$1210. To prevent one major outcome (PID, tubal factor infertility, ectopic pregnancy, chronic pelvic pain, or neonatal pneumonia), 479 women would have to be screened. The net cost of preventing one major outcome is $15 800. Changing the probability of PID after chlamydial infection from 5% to 25% decreases the net cost per major outcome averted from $28 300 to $6380, a reduction of 78%. Results were less sensitive to variations in estimates for other sequelae. The breakeven prevalence of the programme ranges from 6.4% for the scenario with all probabilities for complications set at the maximum value to a prevalence of 100% for probabilities set at the minimum value.
conclusionsSystematic screening of all women aged 15-40 years for asymptomatic C trachomatis infections is not cost effective. Although the results of the analyses are sensitive to variation in the assumptions, the costs exceed the benefits, even in the most optimistic scenario.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.