ArticleBMC public health2006
Does population screening for Chlamydia trachomatis raise anxiety among those tested? Findings from a population based chlamydia screening study.
Article in BMC public health, 2006. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 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
16 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 40 citations in OpenAlex.
- Screening for chlamydia and/or gonorrhea in primary health care: systematic reviews on effectiveness and patient preferences.Systematic reviews · 2021Pooled it
- Recommendation on screening for chlamydia and gonorrhea in primary care for individuals not known to be at high risk.CMAJ : Canadian Medical Association journal = journal de l'Association medicale canadienne · 2021Guideline
- Non-participation in population-based disease prevention programs in general practice.BMC public health · 2012Pooled it
- The National Advisory Committee on Sexually Transmitted and Blood-Borne Infections (NAC-STBBI) Statement: Chlamydia and Gonorrhea screening recommendations for non-pregnant adults and adolescents.Canada communicable disease report = Releve des maladies transmissibles au Canada · 2026Article
- Philippine Clinical Practice Guidelines for Periodic Health Examination: Screening for Infectious Diseases.Acta medica Philippina · 2026Article
- Recurrent SARS-CoV-2 Serology Testing and Pandemic Anxiety: A Study of Pediatric Healthcare Workers.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
- Article
- Observational
- Clinically significant depressive symptoms and sexual behaviour among men who have sex with men.BJPsych open · 2017Article
- Screening for genital chlamydia infection.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2016Review
- Perceptions of Self-Testing for Chlamydia: Understanding and Predicting Self-Test Use.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2016Article
- Exploring access and attitudes to regular sexually transmitted infection screening: the views of young, multi-ethnic, inner-city, female students.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2016Article
- An early evaluation of clinical and economic costs and benefits of implementing point of care NAAT tests for Chlamydia trachomatis and Neisseria gonorrhoea in genitourinary medicine clinics in England.Sexually transmitted infections · 2014Article
- "Pee-in-a-Pot": acceptability and uptake of on-site chlamydia screening in a student population in the Republic of Ireland.BMC infectious diseases · 2010Article
- "...they should be offering it": a qualitative study to investigate young peoples' attitudes towards chlamydia screening in GP surgeries.BMC public health · 2010Article
- Young women's decisions to accept chlamydia screening: influences of stigma and doctor-patient interactions.BMC public 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
7 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe advent of urine testing for Chlamydia trachomatis has raised the possibility of large-scale screening for this sexually transmitted infection, which is now the most common in the United Kingdom. The purpose of this study was to investigate the effect of an invitation to be screened for chlamydia and of receiving a negative result on levels of anxiety, depression and self-esteem.
methods19,773 men and women aged 16 to 39 years, selected at random from 27 general practices in two large city areas (Bristol and Birmingham) were invited by post to send home-collected urine samples or vulvo-vaginal swabs for chlamydia testing. Questionnaires enquiring about anxiety, depression and self-esteem were sent to random samples of those offered screening: one month before the dispatch of invitations; when participants returned samples; and after receiving a negative result.
resultsHome screening was associated with an overall reduction in anxiety scores. An invitation to participate did not increase anxiety levels. Anxiety scores in men were lower after receiving the invitation than at baseline. Amongst women anxiety was reduced after receipt of negative test results. Neither depression nor self-esteem scores were affected by screening.
conclusionPostal screening for chlamydia does not appear to have a negative impact on overall psychological well-being and can lead to a decrease in anxiety levels among respondents. There is, however, a clear difference between men and women in when this reduction occurs.
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.