Evidence map›Paper›PMID 19052178›Full record

ArticleJournal of clinical microbiology2009

Clinic-based evaluation of a rapid point-of-care test for detection of Chlamydia trachomatis in specimens from sex workers in Escuintla, Guatemala.

M Sabidó, G Hernández, V González, X Vallès, A Montoliu, J Figuerola, V Isern, B Viñado, L Figueroa, J Casabona

Abstract readComparative StudyEvaluation Study
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of clinical microbiology, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Diagnosis of Chlamydia trachomatis genital infections in the era of genomic medicine.Brazilian journal of microbiology : [publication of the Brazilian Society for Microbiology] · 2021
    Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. 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

10 authors.

M SabidóFundació Sida i Societat, Barcelona, Spain. msabido@sidaisocietat.org
G Hernández
V González
X Vallès
A Montoliu
J Figuerola
V Isern
B Viñado
L Figueroa
J Casabona

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

We evaluated a rapid point-of-care test for the detection of Chlamydia trachomatis in specimens from 278 sex workers attending sexually transmitted infection clinics in Guatemala. The sensitivity and the specificity of the test compared to the results of PCR were 62.96% and 99.60%, respectively. The test performed moderately well as a screening tool in a context in which clinical follow-up visits are infrequent.

Indexed as

Point-of-Care SystemsAdolescentAdultChlamydia InfectionsChlamydia trachomatisFemaleGuatemalaHumansMolecular Diagnostic TechniquesSensitivity and SpecificitySex Work

Identifiers

PMID19052178
PMCPMC2643691

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.