Evidence map›Paper›PMID 17475686›Full record

ArticleSexually transmitted infections2007

The cost effectiveness of opportunistic chlamydia screening in England.

Elisabeth J Adams, Katherine M E Turner, W John Edmunds

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Sexually transmitted infections, 2007. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 30 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
30citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

30 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. 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 · 2021
    Guideline
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. The economic impact of project MARS (motivating adolescents to reduce sexual risk).Health psychology : official journal of the Division of Health Psychology, American Psychological Association · 2013
    Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. CMAJ : Canadian Medical Association journal = journal de l'Association medicale canadienne · 2021
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Evaluating Cost-effectiveness of Interventions That Affect Fertility and Childbearing: How Health Effects Are Measured Matters.Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making · 2015
    Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Elisabeth J AdamsModelling & Economics Unit, Health Protection Agency, 61 Colindale Avenue, Colindale, London NW9 5EQ, UK.
Katherine M E Turner
W John Edmunds

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BACKGROUND/

aimThe National Chlamydia Screening Programme (NCSP) is being implemented in England. This study aims to estimate the cost effectiveness of (a) the NCSP strategy (annual screening offer to men and women aged under 25 years) and (b) alternative screening strategies.

methodsA stochastic, individual based, dynamic sexual network model was combined with a cost effectiveness model to estimate the complications and associated costs of chlamydial infection. The model was constructed and parameterised from the perspective of the National Health Service (NHS) (England), including the direct costs of infection, complications and screening. Unit costs were derived from standard data sources and published studies. The average and incremental cost effectiveness ratio (cost per major outcome averted or quality adjusted life year (QALY) gained) of chlamydia screening strategies targeting women and/or men of different age groups was estimated. Sensitivity analyses were done to explore model uncertainty.

resultsAll screening strategies modelled are likely to cost the NHS money and improve health. If pelvic inflammatory disease (PID) progression is less than 10% then screening at any level is unlikely to be cost effective. However, if PID progression is 10% or higher the NCSP strategy compared to no screening appears to be cost effective. The incremental cost effectiveness analysis suggests that screening men and women aged under 20 years is the most beneficial strategy that falls below accepted thresholds. There is a high degree of uncertainty in the findings.

conclusionsOffering an annual screening test to men and women aged under 20 years may be the most cost effective strategy (that is, under accepted thresholds) if PID progression is 10% or higher.

Indexed as

Chlamydia trachomatisAdultChlamydia InfectionsContact TracingCost-Benefit AnalysisFemaleHumansMaleMass ScreeningMultivariate AnalysisPelvic Inflammatory DiseaseQuality-Adjusted Life YearsUnited Kingdom

Identifiers

PMID17475686
PMCPMC2598679

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.