ArticlePloS one2015
Anorectal Chlamydia trachomatis Load Is Similar in Men Who Have Sex with Men and Women Reporting Anal Sex.
Article in PloS one, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 18 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Analytical Evaluation of the Abbott RealTime CT/NG Assay for Detection of Chlamydia trachomatis and Neisseria gonorrhoeae in Rectal and Pharyngeal Swabs.The Journal of molecular diagnostics : JMD · 2020Article
- A diagnostic evaluation of a molecular assay used for testing and treating anorectal chlamydia and gonorrhoea infections at the point-of-care in Papua New Guinea.Clinical microbiology and infection : the official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases · 2019Article
- Article
- What explains anorectal chlamydia infection in women? Implications of a mathematical model for test and treatment strategies.Sexually transmitted infections · 2017Article
- Treatment efficacy of azithromycin 1 g single dose versus doxycycline 100 mg twice daily for 7 days for the treatment of rectal chlamydia among men who have sex with men - a double-blind randomised controlled trial protocol.BMC infectious diseases · 2017Article
- Microbiological Characteristics of Chlamydia trachomatis and Neisseria gonorrhoeae Infections in South African Women.Journal of clinical microbiology · 2016Article
- Extragenital Infections Caused by Chlamydia trachomatis and Neisseria gonorrhoeae: A Review of the Literature.Infectious diseases in obstetrics and gynecology · 2016Review
- What is needed to guide testing for anorectal and pharyngeal Chlamydia trachomatis and Neisseria gonorrhoeae in women and men? Evidence and opinion.BMC infectious diseases · 2015Article
- Anogenital infection by Chlamydia trachomatis and Neisseria gonorrhoeae in HIV-infected men and women in Salvador, Brazil.The Brazilian journal of infectious diseases : an official publication of the Brazilian Society of Infectious DiseasesArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAnorectal Chlamydia trachomatis (chlamydia) is frequently diagnosed in men who have sex with men (MSM) and in women, but it is unknown whether these infections are comparable in clinical impact and transmission potential. Quantifying bacterial load and identifying determinants associated with high bacterial load could provide more insight.
methodsWe selected a convenience sample of MSM who reported anal sex (n = 90) and women with concurrent urogenital/anorectal chlamydia who reported anal sex (n = 51) or did not report anal sex (n = 61) from the South Limburg Public Health Service's STI unit. Bacterial load (Chlamydia/ml) was quantified for all samples and log transformed for analyses. Samples with an unquantifiable human leukocyte antigen (n = 9) were excluded from analyses, as they were deemed inadequately sampled.
resultsThe mean log anorectal chlamydia load (3.50) was similar for MSM and women who reported having anal sex (3.80, P = 0.21). The anorectal chlamydia load was significantly higher in these groups than in women who did not report having anal sex (2.76, P = 0.001). Detectable load values ranged from 1.81-6.32 chlamydia/ml for MSM, 1.74-7.33 chlamydia/ml for women who reported having anal sex and 1.84-6.31 chlamydia/ml for women who did not report having anal sex. Symptoms and several other determinants were not associated with anorectal chlamydia load.
conclusionsWomen who did not report anal sex had lower anorectal loads, but they were within a similar range to the other two groups. Anorectal chlamydia load was comparable between MSM and women who reported anal sex, suggesting similar transmission potential.
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.