ArticleAnnals of family medicine
Impact of Cervical Cancer Screening Guidelines on Screening for Chlamydia.
Article in Annals of family medicine. 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, 19 citations in OpenAlex.
- Chlamydia and gonorrhoea screening and diagnosis by anatomical site among individuals with opposite-sex partners: a rapid review.Sexually transmitted infections · 2025Article
- Unintended Consequences Following the 2014 American Academy of Pediatrics Policy Change for Palivizumab Prophylaxis among Infants Born at Less than 29 Weeks' Gestation.American journal of perinatology · 2021Article
- Cervicitis: Balancing the Goals of Empiric Therapy and Antimicrobial Stewardship to Improve Women's Health.Sexually transmitted diseases · 2020Article
- Linking common non-coding RNAs of human lung cancer and M. tuberculosis.Bioinformation · 2018Article
- The Effect of Changes in Cervical Cancer Screening Guidelines on Chlamydia Testing.Annals of family medicine · 2017Article
- From Promoting Healthy Sexual Functioning to Managing Biomedical Sexual Dysfunction: Health Professional Views of Youth Sexual Health.SAGE open nursingArticle
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The highest prevalence of chlamydia infection in the United States is among people aged 15 to 24 years. We assessed the impact of not doing routine cervical cancer screening on the rates of chlamydia screening in women aged 15 to 21 years. We classified visits to family medicine ambulatory clinics according to their timing relative to the 2009 guideline change that led to more restrictive cervical cancer screening. Women had higher odds of being screened for chlamydia before vs after the guideline change (odds ratio = 13.97; 95% CI, 9.17-21.29; P <.001). Chlamydia and cervical cancer screening need to be uncoupled and new screening opportunities should be identified.
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.