ArticleSexually transmitted diseases2015
Management of Pelvic Inflammatory Disease in Selected U.S. Sexually Transmitted Disease Clinics: Sexually Transmitted Disease Surveillance Network, January 2010-December 2011.
Article in Sexually transmitted diseases, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Management of Pelvic Inflammatory Disease in Clinical Practice.Therapeutics and clinical risk management · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundPelvic inflammatory disease (PID) remains an important source of preventable reproductive morbidity, but no recent studies have singularly focused on US sexually transmitted disease (STD) clinics in relationship to established guidelines for diagnosis and treatment.
methodsOf the 83,076 female patients seen in 14 STD clinics participating in the STD Surveillance Network, 1080 (1.3%) were diagnosed as having PID from 2010 to 2011. A random sample of 219 (20%) women were selected, and medical records were reviewed for clinical history, examination findings, treatment, and diagnostic testing. Our primary outcomes were to evaluate how well PID diagnosis and treatment practices in STD clinic settings follow the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) treatment guidelines and to describe age group-specific rates of laboratory-confirmed Chlamydia trachomatis (CT) and Neisseria gonorrhoeae (GC) in patients clinically diagnosed as having PID in the last 12 months, inclusive of the PID visit.
resultsAmong the 219 women, 70.3% of the cases met the CDC treatment case definition for PID, 90.4% had testing for CT and GC on the PID visit, and 68.0% were treated with a CDC-recommended outpatient regimen. In the last 12 months, 95.4% were tested for CT or GC, and positivity for either organism was 43.9% in women aged 25 years or younger with PID, compared with 19.4% of women older than 25 years with PID.
conclusionsCompliance with CDC guidelines was documented for many of the women with PID, though not all. Our findings underscore the need for continued efforts to optimize quality of care and adherence to current guidance for PID management given the anticipated expertise of providers in these settings.
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.