Trial reportInfectious diseases in obstetrics and gynecology2007
Cost comparisons between home- and clinic-based testing for sexually transmitted diseases in high-risk young women.
Trial report in Infectious diseases in obstetrics and gynecology, 2007. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 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
18 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Bacterial Sexually Transmitted Disease Screening Outside the Clinic--Implications for the Modern Sexually Transmitted Disease Program.Sexually transmitted diseases · 2016Pooled it
- Home-based versus clinic-based specimen collection in the management of Chlamydia trachomatis and Neisseria gonorrhoeae infections.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2015Pooled it
- Home-based chlamydia and gonorrhoea screening: a systematic review of strategies and outcomes.BMC public health · 2013Pooled it
- At-Home Self-Collection of Urine or Vaginal Samples for Gonorrhea and Chlamydia Screening Among Young People Who Were Assigned Female at Birth.AJPM focus · 2023Article
- Diagnostic Infectious Diseases Testing Outside Clinics: A Global Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.Open forum infectious diseases · 2020Review
- Cost-Utility of Antimicrobial Prophylaxis for Treatment of Children With Vesicoureteral Reflux.Frontiers in pediatrics · 2019Article
- Online testing for sexually transmitted infections: A whole systems approach to predicting value.PloS one · 2019Article
- The acceptability and cost of a home-based chlamydia retesting strategy: findings from the REACT randomised controlled trial.BMC public health · 2016Article
- How online sexual health services could work; generating theory to support development.BMC health services research · 2015Article
- Could home sexually transmitted infection specimen collection with e-prescription be a cost-effective strategy for clinical trials and clinical care?Sexually transmitted diseases · 2015Article
- Trichomonas vaginalis infection in men who submit self-collected penile swabs after internet recruitment.Sexually transmitted infections · 2013Article
- Can mailed swab samples be dry-shipped for the detection of Chlamydia trachomatis, Neisseria gonorrhoeae, and Trichomonas vaginalis by nucleic acid amplification tests?Diagnostic microbiology and infectious disease · 2012Article
- Trichomonas vaginalis infection in women who submit self-obtained vaginal samples after internet recruitment.Sexually transmitted diseases · 2011Article
- Cost-effectiveness analysis of Chlamydia trachomatis screening via internet-based self-collected swabs compared with clinic-based sample collection.Sexually transmitted diseases · 2011Article
- Cost-effectiveness of implementing the chronic care model for diabetes care in a military population.Journal of diabetes science and technology · 2011Article
- Screening for sexually transmitted infections at home or in the clinic?Current opinion in infectious diseases · 2011Review
- Home versus clinic-based specimen collection for Chlamydia trachomatis and Neisseria gonorrhoeae.Expert review of anti-infective therapy · 2011Review
- Internet-based screening for sexually transmitted infections to reach nonclinic populations in the community: risk factors for infection in men.Sexually transmitted diseases · 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Home testing for chlamydia and gonorrhea increases screening rates, but the cost consequences of this intervention are unclear. We examined the cost differences between home-based and clinic-based testing and the cost-effectiveness of home testing based on the DAISY study, a randomized controlled trial. Direct and indirect costs were estimated for home and clinic testing, and cost-effectiveness was calculated as cost per additional test performed. In the clinic testing group, direct costs were 49/test and indirect costs (the costs of seeking or receiving care) were 62/test. Home testing cost was 25/test. We found that home testing was cost saving when all testing for all patients was considered. However cost savings were not seen when only asymptomatic tests or when patient subgroups were considered. A home testing program could be cost saving, depending on whether changes in clinic testing frequency occur when home testing is available.
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.