Trial reportJournal of clinical microbiology2005
Use of pooled urine samples and automated DNA isolation to achieve improved sensitivity and cost-effectiveness of large-scale testing for Chlamydia trachomatis in pregnant women.
Trial report in Journal of clinical microbiology, 2005. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers.
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
17 citing papers in PubMed, 46 citations in OpenAlex.
- Cohort PCR Testing: A Strategic Method for Rapid SARS-CoV-2 Screening.American journal of clinical pathology · 2020Article
- Pooling Pharyngeal, Anorectal, and Urogenital Samples for Screening Asymptomatic Men Who Have Sex with Men for Chlamydia trachomatis and Neisseria gonorrhoeae.Journal of clinical microbiology · 2020Article
- Article
- Article
- Cost-effective pooling of DNA from nasopharyngeal swab samples for large-scale detection of bacteria by real-time PCR.Journal of clinical microbiology · 2015Article
- Regression analysis for multiple-disease group testing data.Statistics in medicine · 2013Article
- The Generation R Study: design and cohort update 2012.European journal of epidemiology · 2012Article
- Pooling nasopharyngeal/throat swab specimens to increase testing capacity for influenza viruses by PCR.Journal of clinical microbiology · 2012Article
- Chlamydia trachomatis infection during pregnancy associated with preterm delivery: a population-based prospective cohort study.European journal of epidemiology · 2011Article
- The Generation R Study: design and cohort update 2010.European journal of epidemiology · 2010Article
- Group testing regression models with fixed and random effects.Biometrics · 2009Article
- Bias, efficiency, and agreement for group-testing regression models.Journal of statistical computation and simulation · 2009Article
- The Generation R Study: design and cohort update until the age of 4 years.European journal of epidemiology · 2008Article
- The Generation R Study Biobank: a resource for epidemiological studies in children and their parents.European journal of epidemiology · 2007Article
- Detection of Chlamydia trachomatis by nucleic acid amplification testing: our evaluation suggests that CDC-recommended approaches for confirmatory testing are ill-advised.Journal of clinical microbiology · 2006Article
- Chlamydia trachomatis infections in multi-ethnic urban youth: a pilot combining STI health education and outreach testing in Rotterdam, Netherlands.Sexually transmitted infections · 2006Article
- Cost-effectiveness analysis of Chlamydia trachomatis screening in Dutch pregnant women.Pathogens and global healthArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The success of large-scale screening for Chlamydia trachomatis depends on the availability of noninvasive samples, low costs, and high-quality testing. To evaluate C. trachomatis testing with pregnant women, first-void urine specimens from 750 consecutive asymptomatic pregnant women from the Rotterdam area (The Netherlands) were collected. Initially, we investigated the performance of three different DNA isolation methods with 350 of these urines and 70 pools of 5 of the same subset of urine samples. The routinely used COBAS AMPLICOR test was compared to the COBAS AMPLICOR test with prior DNA isolation by use of the MagNA Pure large-volume kit and the MagNA Pure bacterial DNA isolation kit. The latter combination provided the best DNA test for pooled urines, with a sensitivity twice that of the other methods. Next, using all 750 urines, the COBAS AMPLICOR performance for individual testing was compared to pooled testing with the standard COBAS AMPLICOR procedure and subsequently to pooled testing with COBAS AMPLICOR in combination with the MagNA Pure bacterial DNA isolation kit. The sensitivity of COBAS AMPLICOR was 65% on individual and 42% on pooled urines but improved to 92% on pooled urines with the MagNA Pure bacterial DNA isolation kit, making this combination the best screening method. The C. trachomatis prevalence in this population appeared to be 6.4%. Additionally, the cost of the combined MagNA Pure bacterial DNA isolation kit and COBAS AMPLICOR method on pooled urines was only 56% of the cost of the standard COBAS AMPLICOR test applied to individual urines. Costs per positive case detected in the combined method were 39% of standard costs.
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.