Trial reportPloS one2013
Effects of population based screening for Chlamydia infections in the Netherlands limited by declining participation rates.
Trial report in PloS one, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- The influence of two different invitation letters on Chlamydia testing participation: randomized controlled trial.Journal of medical Internet research · 2014Trial
- Modelling the impact of tailored behavioural interventions on chlamydia transmission.Scientific reports · 2021Article
- Study protocol of the iMPaCT project: a longitudinal cohort study assessing psychological determinants, sexual behaviour and chlamydia (re)infections in heterosexual STI clinic visitors.BMC infectious diseases · 2018Article
- Double trouble: modelling the impact of low risk perception and high-risk sexual behaviour on chlamydia transmission.Journal of the Royal Society, Interface · 2018Article
- The Netherlands Chlamydia cohort study (NECCST) protocol to assess the risk of late complications following Chlamydia trachomatis infection in women.BMC infectious diseases · 2017Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundA large trial to investigate the effectiveness of population based screening for chlamydia infections was conducted in the Netherlands in 2008-2012. The trial was register based and consisted of four rounds of screening of women and men in the age groups 16-29 years in three regions in the Netherlands. Data were collected on participation rates and positivity rates per round. A modeling study was conducted to project screening effects for various screening strategies into the future. METHODS AND
findingsWe used a stochastic network simulation model incorporating partnership formation and dissolution, aging and a sexual life course perspective. Trends in baseline rates of chlamydia testing and treatment were used to describe the epidemiological situation before the start of the screening program. Data on participation rates was used to describe screening uptake in rural and urban areas. Simulations were used to project the effectiveness of screening on chlamydia prevalence for a time period of 10 years. In addition, we tested alternative screening strategies, such as including only women, targeting different age groups, and biennial screening. Screening reduced prevalence by about 1% in the first two screening rounds and leveled off after that. Extrapolating observed participation rates into the future indicated very low participation in the long run. Alternative strategies only marginally changed the effectiveness of screening. Higher participation rates as originally foreseen in the program would have succeeded in reducing chlamydia prevalence to very low levels in the long run.
conclusionsDecreasing participation rates over time profoundly impact the effectiveness of population based screening for chlamydia infections. Using data from several consecutive rounds of screening in a simulation model enabled us to assess the future effectiveness of screening on prevalence. If participation rates cannot be kept at a sufficient level, the effectiveness of screening on prevalence will remain limited.
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.