Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22907483›Full record

ReviewCurrent opinion in obstetrics & gynecology2012

Expedited partner therapy for sexually transmitted infections.

Matthew Hogben, Sarah Kidd, Gale R Burstein

Open access · greenAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Current opinion in obstetrics & gynecology, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
1.1field-weighted citation impact, top 24% of its field
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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. 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

3 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Matthew HogbenDivision of STD Prevention, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia, USA. mhogben@cdc.gov
Sarah Kidd
Gale R Burstein
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention · KECenters for Disease Control and Prevention · USErie County Medical Center · US

Funding

Intramural CDC HHS CC999999
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purpose of reviewIn 2006, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recommended Expedited Partner Therapy (EPT) as a clinical option for assuring treatment of sex partners of persons infected with sexually transmitted infections. In this review, we provide an update on research, evaluation and efforts to increase EPT coverage. We also attend to EPT for gonorrhea in the context of antimicrobial resistance. RECENT

findingsControlled trials in the United States and United Kingdom have presented increasing variety in intervention approaches. Trials and program evaluations typically demonstrate increased partner treatment rates, although only some studies show reductions in follow-up infection rates. Coverage has increased substantially, with over 30 states permitting EPT for chlamydial infection, gonorrhea, or both. The prospect of cephalosporin-resistant gonorrhea, however, raises the prospect that EPT may become less feasible as a partner treatment approach for gonorrhea patients. SUMMARY: Clinicians should continue to be aware of the importance of partner managements for STD-infected patients, with EPT being an evidence-based intervention in that respect. The variety in EPT models provides alternatives that may suit some practices and venues. For clinicians seeing gonorrhea patients, effective counseling models - enhanced patient referral - should be closely examined in case oral treatment for gonorrhea becomes infeasible.

Indexed as

Sexual PartnersAnti-Infective AgentsContact TracingDrug Resistance, MicrobialFemaleGonorrheaHumansMaleSexually Transmitted DiseasesAnti-Infective Agents

Identifiers

PMID22907483
PMCPMC6357222
OpenAlexW2076039187

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.