Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26093189›Full record

ArticleContraception2015

Risk-based screening for Chlamydia trachomatis and Neisseria gonorrhoeae prior to intrauterine device insertion.

Jaclyn M Grentzer, Jeffrey F Peipert, Qiuhong Zhao, Colleen McNicholas, Gina M Secura, Tessa Madden

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Contraception, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
–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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Biofilm in Genital Ecosystem: A Potential Risk Factor forThe Canadian journal of infectious diseases & medical microbiology = Journal canadien des maladies infectieuses et de la microbiologie medicale · 2019
    Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Jaclyn M GrentzerDivision of Clinical Research, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Washington University in St. Louis School of Medicine, Saint Louis, MO, 63110. Electronic address: grentzerj@wudosis.wustl.edu.
Jeffrey F PeipertDivision of Clinical Research, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Washington University in St. Louis School of Medicine, Saint Louis, MO, 63110.
Qiuhong ZhaoDivision of Clinical Research, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Washington University in St. Louis School of Medicine, Saint Louis, MO, 63110.
Colleen McNicholasDivision of Clinical Research, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Washington University in St. Louis School of Medicine, Saint Louis, MO, 63110.
Gina M SecuraDivision of Clinical Research, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Washington University in St. Louis School of Medicine, Saint Louis, MO, 63110.
Tessa MaddenDivision of Clinical Research, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Washington University in St. Louis School of Medicine, Saint Louis, MO, 63110.

Funding

Washington University Institute of Clinical and Translational SciencesUL1TR000448 · NCATS · WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY · PI EVANOFF, BRADLEY A · 2012 to 2016
$41.4M
Washington University Institute of Clinical and Translational SciencesTL1TR000449 · NCATS · WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY · PI EVANOFF, BRADLEY A · 2012 to 2016
$2.5M
Reproductive Epidemiology Training Program at Washington University in St. LouisT32HD055172 · NICHD · WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY · PI MADDEN, TESSA · 2009 to 2018
$2.5M
EVALUATION AND TESTING OF A DECISION SUPPORT AID IN CONTRACEPTIVE DECISION MAKINGK23HD070979 · NICHD · WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY · PI MADDEN, TESSA · 2012 to 2014
$367k
NCATS NIH HHS TL1 TR000449NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR000448NICHD NIH HHS K23 HD070979NICHD NIH HHS K23HD070979NICHD NIH HHS T32 HD055172
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveThe objective was to compare three strategies for Chlamydia trachomatis and Neisseria gonorrhoeae screening prior to intrauterine device (IUD) insertion. STUDY

designThis was a secondary analysis of the Contraceptive CHOICE Project. We measured the prevalence of C. trachomatis and/or N. gonorrhoeae at the time of IUD insertion. We then compared sensitivity, specificity, negative and positive predictive values, and likelihood ratios for three screening strategies for C. trachomatis and N. gonorrhoeae prior to IUD insertion: (a) "age-based" — age ≤25 years alone; (b) "age/partner-based" — age ≤25 and/or multiple sexual partners; and (c) "risk-based" — age ≤25, multiple sexual partners, inconsistent condom use and/or history of prior sexually transmitted infection (STI).

resultsAmong 5087 IUD users, 140 (2.8%) tested positive for C. trachomatis, 16 (0.3%) tested positive for N. gonorrhoeae, and 6 (0.1%) were positive for both at the time of IUD insertion. The "risk-based" screening strategy had the highest sensitivity (99.3%) compared to "age-based" and "age/partner-based" screening (80.7% and 84.7%, respectively.) Only one (0.7%) woman with a chlamydia or gonorrhea infection would not have been screened using "risk-based" screening.

conclusionA risk-based strategy to screen for C. trachomatis and N. gonorrhoeae prior to IUD insertion has higher sensitivity than screening based on age alone or age and multiple sexual partners. IMPLICATIONS: Using a risk-based screening strategy (age≤25, multiple sexual partners, inconsistent condom use and/or history of an STI) to determine who should be screened for C. trachomatis and N. gonorrhoeae prior to IUD insertion will miss very few cases of infection and obviates the need for universal screening.

Indexed as

AdolescentAdultChlamydia InfectionsChlamydia trachomatisFemaleGonorrheaHumansIntrauterine Devices, MedicatedLogistic ModelsMass ScreeningMiddle AgedMissouriNeisseria gonorrhoeaeProspective StudiesRisk FactorsYoung AdultChlamydiaContraceptionGonorrheaIntrauterine deviceSexually transmitted infections

Identifiers

PMID26093189
PMCPMC4575889

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.