ArticleAnnals of epidemiology2008
Screening young adults for prevalent chlamydial infection in community settings.
Article in Annals of epidemiology, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 2 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 28 citations in OpenAlex.
- Socioeconomic factors and other sources of variation in the prevalence of genital chlamydia infections: A systematic review and meta-analysis.BMC public health · 2015Pooled it
- Chlamydia prevalence in the general population: is there a sex difference? a systematic review.BMC infectious diseases · 2013Pooled it
- Inequities inAmerican journal of public health · 2022Article
- Enteric disease episodes and the risk of acquiring a future sexually transmitted infection: a prediction model in Montreal residents.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2016Article
- Prevalence of chlamydia in young adulthood and association with life course socioeconomic position: birth cohort study.PloS one · 2014Article
- Higher yet suboptimal chlamydia testing rates at community health centers and outpatient clinics compared with physician offices.American journal of public health · 2012Article
- Performance of risk-based criteria for targeting acute HIV screening in San Francisco.PloS one · 2011Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
purposeCommunity-based testing may identify young adults in the general population with sexually transmitted chlamydial infection. To develop selective screening guidelines appropriate for community settings, the authors conducted a cross-sectional analysis of the National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health Wave III (April 2, 2001, to May 9, 2002).
methodsSeparately for women and men, we developed three predictive models by using unconditional multiple logistic regression for survey data. To account for racial/ethnic disparity in prevalence, initial models included identical predictor characteristics plus information on 1) respondent's race/ethnicity; or 2) respondent's most recent partner's race/ethnicity; or 3) no information on race/ethnicity.
resultsChlamydia trachomatis diagnosis was available for 10,928 (88.6%) of the sexually experienced respondents. A combination of five characteristics for women and six characteristics for men identified approximately 80% of infections when testing </=50% of the population. Information regarding race/ethnicity dramatically affected algorithm performance.
conclusionThe use of race/ethnicity in any screening algorithm is problematic and controversial, but the model without race information missed many diagnoses in the minority groups. Universal screening in high-prevalence regions and selective screening in low-prevalence regions may be one method of reaching the affected populations while avoiding the stigma of guidelines incorporating race/ethnicity.
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.