ArticleSexually transmitted infections2005
Chlamydia trachomatis in female sex workers in Belgium: 1998-2003.
Article in Sexually transmitted infections, 2005. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Sex Worker Health Outcomes in High-Income Countries of Varied Regulatory Environments: A Systematic Review.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021Pooled it
- The Role of Disgust in Male Sexual Decision-Making.Frontiers in psychology · 2018Article
- Sexually transmitted infections among female sex workers tested at STI clinics in the Netherlands, 2006-2013.Emerging themes in epidemiology · 2015Article
- The sexual health of female sex workers compared with other women in England: analysis of cross-sectional data from genitourinary medicine clinics.Sexually transmitted infections · 2014Article
- Factors mediating HIV risk among female sex workers in Europe: a systematic review and ecological analysis.BMJ open · 2013Article
- Condom Use and Prevalence of Genital Chlamydia trachomatis Among the Korean Female Sex Workers.Epidemiology and health · 2010Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveWe analysed the results of a 6 year screening period for Chlamydia trachomatis in a group of female sex workers (FSW) of all ages in Ghent, Belgium.
methodsThey were tested in the context of an outreach health programme for sex workers. C trachomatis was tested by Cobas Amplicor CT/NG PCR.
resultsIn the 6 year period, 1643 tests were performed on 950 different sex workers (nationality: Belgian 60.3%, other western European (mostly French) 21.0%, African 12.4%, eastern European 3.0%, other 3.3%; workplace: bar/sauna 49.0%, private homes 31.8%, windows 18.2%, and escorts 1.0%). Baseline prevalence (only considering results of first test) was 70/950 or 7.4% (95% CI 5.7 to 9.0). The incidence rate was 98 episodes in 1347 person years or 7.3/100 person years (95% CI 5.9 to 8.7). There was a strong age effect. There was no clear relation with nationality or the workplace.
conclusionsThe prevalence was higher than in general populations selected in Belgium, Britain, and the Netherlands. Since younger age is a risk factor for C trachomatis, it is very important to contact these women as soon as possible when they enter the trade. General screening for C trachomatis in young women is not common practice in Belgium. Sex workers often do not tell doctors about their work and will therefore not be screened unless in the context of specific outreach projects.
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.