ArticleSexually transmitted infections2006
Is screening for sexually transmitted infections in men who have sex with men who receive non-occupational HIV post-exposure prophylaxis worthwhile?
Article in Sexually transmitted infections, 2006. 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 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 23 citations in OpenAlex.
- The prevalence of Chlamydia trachomatis infection in Australia: a systematic review and meta-analysis.BMC infectious diseases · 2012Pooled it
- Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND/
aimsNon-occupational HIV post-exposure prophylaxis (NPEP) is routinely prescribed after high risk sexual exposure. This provides an opportunity to screen and treat individuals at risk of concurrent sexually transmitted infections (STI). The aim of this study was to assess the efficacy of an STI screening programme in individuals receiving NPEP.
methodsSTI screens were offered to all individuals receiving NPEP from March 2001 to May 2004. Screen results were compared to type of sexual exposure and baseline patient characteristics.
resultsA total of 253 subjects were screened, representing 85% of the target population. All were men who have sex with men (MSM). Common exposure risks were receptive anal intercourse (RAI) in 61% and insertive anal intercourse (IAI) in 33%. 32 (13%) individuals had one or more STI. The most common STIs were rectal infections with Chlamydia trachomatis (CT) and Neisseria gonorrhoeae (NG) in 11 (4.5%) and six (2.5%) individuals, respectively. Subjects with rectal CT were significantly more likely to be co-infected with rectal NG (p<0.001). There was no association between the presence of a rectal STI and age or exposure risk. Only six (19%) individuals with an STI were symptomatic at screening.
conclusionIn this cohort of MSM receiving NPEP, high rates of concomitant STIs are observed highlighting the importance of STI screening in this setting.
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.