ArticleContraception2015
Risk-based screening for Chlamydia trachomatis and Neisseria gonorrhoeae prior to intrauterine device insertion.
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.
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 Impact of Intrauterine Devices on the Risk of Ureaplasma Species Overgrowth: A Review of the Literature.Cureus · 2025Review
- Highly-Specific Single-Stranded Oligonucleotides and Functional Nanoprobes for Clinical Determination of Chlamydia Trachomatis and Neisseria Gonorrhoeae Infections.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2023Article
- Risk-based screening to identify reproductive tract infection among HIV-infected women desiring use of intrauterine contraceptives.BMJ sexual & reproductive health · 2021Article
- 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 · 2019Article
- The safety of intrauterine contraception initiation among women with current asymptomatic cervical infections or at increased risk of sexually transmitted infections.Contraception · 2016Review
- Eliminating health disparities in unintended pregnancy with long-acting reversible contraception (LARC).American journal of obstetrics and gynecology · 2016Review
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
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
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.