ReviewExpert review of anti-infective therapy2011
Home versus clinic-based specimen collection for Chlamydia trachomatis and Neisseria gonorrhoeae.
Review in Expert review of anti-infective therapy, 2011. 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, 41 citations in OpenAlex.
- Self-collection of samples as an additional approach to deliver testing services for sexually transmitted infections: a systematic review and meta-analysis.BMJ global health · 2019Pooled 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
- Rationale and design of REACT: a randomised controlled trial assessing the effectiveness of home-collection to increase chlamydia retesting and detect repeat positive tests.BMC infectious diseases · 2014Trial
- Systematic screening with information and home sampling for genital Chlamydia trachomatis infections in young men and women in Norway: a randomized controlled trial.BMC infectious diseases · 2013Trial
- Review
- Comparison of Different Self-Sampling Devices for Molecular Detection of Human Papillomavirus (HPV) and Other Sexually Transmitted Infections (STIs): A Pilot Study.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Copan Walk Away Specimen Processor (WASP) Automated System for Pathogen Detection in Female Reproductive Tract Specimens.Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2021Article
- Acceptability and efficacy of vaginal self-sampling for genital infection and bacterial vaginosis: A cross-sectional study.PloS one · 2021Article
- Acceptability and feasibility of recruiting women to collect a self-administered vaginal swab at a pharmacy clinic for sexually transmissible infection screening.Sexual health · 2020Article
- Accuracy of Curable Sexually Transmitted Infections and Genital Mycoplasmas Screening by Multiplex Real-Time PCR Using a Self-Collected Veil among Adult Women in Sub-Saharan Africa.Infectious diseases in obstetrics and gynecology · 2019Article
- Home Self-Collection by Mail to Test for Human Papillomavirus and Sexually Transmitted Infections.Obstetrics and gynecology · 2018Observational
- Let's Take A "Selfie": Self-Collected Samples for Sexually Transmitted Infections.Sexually transmitted diseases · 2018Article
- Article
- The acceptability and cost of a home-based chlamydia retesting strategy: findings from the REACT randomised controlled trial.BMC public health · 2016Article
- Sexually transmitted infection testing practices among 'money boys' and general men who have sex with men in Shanghai, China: objective versus self-reported status.Sexual health · 2014Article
- Advances and challenges in biosensor-based diagnosis of infectious diseases.Expert review of molecular diagnostics · 2014Review
- Control of Neisseria gonorrhoeae in the era of evolving antimicrobial resistance.Infectious disease clinics of North America · 2013Review
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
Abstract
Sexually transmitted infections (STIs) are a major public health concern that must be addressed with innovative screening methods to supplement traditional approaches. Home-based screening with self-collected urine or vaginal specimens is a highly feasible and acceptable method, and shows promise in improving STI screening rates in both men and women. Home collection kits have been offered in a variety of settings, with results ranging from very modest improvements in screening rates to 100-fold increases beyond the rates observed with clinic-based screening. This article describes and evaluates the effectiveness and limitations of various home screening strategies used for the detection of STIs.
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.