ArticleSexually transmitted infections2003
Opportunistic screening for genital chlamydial infection. II: prevalence among healthcare attenders, outcome, and evaluation of positive cases.
Article in Sexually transmitted infections, 2003. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 29 papers, 3 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
29 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 130 citations in OpenAlex.
- Screening for nonviral sexually transmitted infections in adolescents and young adults.Pediatrics · 2014Guideline
- Perioperative antibiotics to prevent infection after first-trimester abortion.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2012Pooled it
- Efficacy of interventions to increase the uptake of chlamydia screening in primary care: a systematic review.BMC infectious diseases · 2011Pooled it
- Partner notification of chlamydia infection in primary care: randomised controlled trial and analysis of resource use.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2006Trial
- The chlamydia screening studies: rationale and design.Sexually transmitted infections · 2004Trial
- De-Sexualizing Partner Notification: A Qualitative Study on Chinese Young Adults with Chlamydia.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021Article
- Article
- Dynamics of NKT-Cell Responses to Chlamydial Infection.Frontiers in immunology · 2015Review
- Using educational outreach and a financial incentive to increase general practices' contribution to chlamydia screening in South-East London 2003-2011.BMC public health · 2012Article
- Chlamydia screening in England: a qualitative study of the narrative behind the policy.BMC public health · 2012Article
- Evaluation of sexual history-based screening of anatomic sites for chlamydia trachomatis and neisseria gonorrhoeae infection in men having sex with men in routine practice.BMC infectious diseases · 2011Article
- "...they should be offering it": a qualitative study to investigate young peoples' attitudes towards chlamydia screening in GP surgeries.BMC public health · 2010Article
- Chlamydia trachomatis today: treatment, detection, immunogenetics and the need for a greater global understanding of chlamydial disease pathogenesis.Drugs of today (Barcelona, Spain : 1998) · 2009Review
- Take the sex out of STI screening! Views of young women on implementing chlamydia screening in General Practice.BMC infectious diseases · 2008Article
- Use of a primary care database to determine trends in genital chlamydia testing, diagnostic episodes and management in UK general practice, 1990-2004.Sexually transmitted infections · 2007Article
- Healthcare and patient costs of a proactive chlamydia screening programme: the Chlamydia Screening Studies project.Sexually transmitted infections · 2007Article
- The cost effectiveness of opportunistic chlamydia screening in England.Sexually transmitted infections · 2007Article
- Who uses condoms with whom? Evidence from national probability sample surveys.Sexually transmitted infections · 2006Article
- With appropriate incentives, general practice can improve the coverage of the National Chlamydia Screening Programme.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2006Article
- Best practice in primary care pathology: review 4.Journal of clinical pathology · 2006Review
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
16 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo determine the prevalence and treatment outcomes among young women screened opportunistically for genital Chlamydia trachomatis and to evaluate the impact of screening in those participating.
designAn opportunistic screening programme (1 September 1999 to 31 August 2000) using urine samples, tested by ligase chain reaction (LCR). In-depth interviews were used for programme evaluation.
settingScreening was offered in two health authorities at general practice, family planning, genitourinary medicine (GUM), adolescent sexual health, termination of pregnancy clinics and women's services in hospitals (antenatal, colposcopy, gynaecology and infertility clinics). Main participants: Sexually active women (16-24 years) attending for any reason.
main outcome measuresScreening data: prevalence of infection by age and healthcare setting; proportion of positive patients attending for treatment. Evaluation data: participants' attitudes and views towards screening and follow up.
resultsIn total, 16 930 women (16-24 years) were screened. Prevalence was higher in younger women (16-20) than those aged 21-24 years and was highly variable at different healthcare settings (range 3.4%-17.6%). Prevalence was approximately 9% in general practice. The role of the project health advisers in managing results and coordinating treatment of positive individuals was essential; the vast majority of all positives were known to be treated. Women felt that screening was beneficial. Improving awareness and education about sexually transmitted infections is required to alleviate negative reactions associated with testing positive for infection.
conclusionsPrevalence of infection outside GUM clinics is substantial and opportunistic screening using urine samples is an acceptable method of reaching individuals with infection who do not normally present at specialist clinics.
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.