ArticleSexually transmitted infections2003
Variation in clinical practice in genitourinary medicine clinics in the United Kingdom.
Article in Sexually transmitted infections, 2003. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- "It feels good to be told that I'm all clear": patients' accounts of retesting following genital chlamydial infection.Sexually transmitted infections · 2006Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThis study was conducted to examine the variation in clinical practice in genitourinary medicine clinics in the United Kingdom in early 2002.
methodsQuestionnaires were sent to all 234 consultants in charge of genitourinary medicine clinics in the United Kingdom in March-May 2002. The questions concerned clinical practice in respect of asymptomatic patients presenting for an infection screen, and practice in respect of some specific sexually transmitted and other genitourinary infections.
resultsThe test for infection least likely to be offered to heterosexuals is an HIV test (71% and 70% of clinics routinely offer this to male and female heterosexuals respectively). The practice of permitting "low risk" patients to telephone for their HIV results now extends to 24% of clinics. 34% of clinics do not require patients with non-specific urethritis to attend for follow up. 41% of clinics routinely ask patients treated for Chlamydia trachomatis to return for a follow up chlamydia detection test. 25% of clinics routinely offer two tests of cure to all patients with gonorrhoea. 6% of clinics do not routinely offer syphilis serology to heterosexuals. Other significant variations in clinical practice were documented.
conclusionsOverall, our findings indicate the need for further evidence to guide clinical practice and a wider knowledge and debate of national guidelines.
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.