ArticleSexually transmitted infections2007
Data from UK genitourinary medicine clinics, 2006: a mixed picture.
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 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Distribution and risk factors of Trichomonas vaginalis infection in England: an epidemiological study using electronic health records from sexually transmitted infection clinics, 2009-2011.Epidemiology and infection · 2014Article
- The epidemiology of gonorrhoea in London: a Bayesian spatial modelling approach.Epidemiology and infection · 2014Article
- The cell-penetrating peptide, Pep-1, has activity against intracellular chlamydial growth but not extracellular forms of Chlamydia trachomatis.The Journal of antimicrobial chemotherapy · 2009Article
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo give an overview of the latest latest trends in diagnoses made and services provided by genitourinary medicine (GUM) clinics in the UK.
methodsAggregate data collected from the KC60 statistical returns for GUM clinics in England, Wales and Northern Ireland and disaggregate data collected using the STI Surveillance System for GUM Clinics in Scotland. These data were collated and numbers of diagnoses were adjusted for missing clinic data. RESULTS &
conclusionOverall, numbers of new diagnoses of sexually transmitted infections (STIs) continued to rise in 2006. However, there was some evidence of improvement, with new diagnoses of gonorrhoea falling for the fourth successive year. Chlamydia continued to be the most common STI diagnosed in GUM clinics, and the sharp rise in new diagnoses over the last 10 years was most likely associated with an increase in testing volume and accuracy. The highest rates of STI diagnoses continued, in the main, to be among 16-24-year-olds, and there were some notable rises among this age group also: new diagnoses of genital herpes in teenage women rose by 16% in 2006. Improving the sexual health of men who have sex with men (MSM) must remain a priority, as the increase in numbers of new STI diagnoses among MSM over the past 10 years continued unabated into 2006. However, despite facing the challenge of reducing patient waiting times, there has been a considerable rise in sexual health screens and HIV tests being provided by GUM services, and this could, if sustained, result in significant improvements in sexual health in the coming years.
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.