Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26308015›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of environmental research and public health2015

A Web-Based Respondent Driven Sampling Pilot Targeting Young People at Risk for Chlamydia Trachomatis in Social and Sexual Networks with Testing: A Use Evaluation.

Kevin Theunissen, Christian Hoebe, Gerjo Kok, Rik Crutzen, Chakib Kara-Zaïtri, Nanne de Vries, Jan van Bergen, Robert Hamilton, Marianne van der Sande, Nicole Dukers-Muijrers

Open access · goldAbstract readEvaluation Study
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
0.7field-weighted citation impact, top 27% of its field
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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors at 6 institutions in 2 countries.

Kevin TheunissenDepartment of Sexual Health, Infectious Diseases and Environmental Health, South Limburg Public Health Services, 6160 HA, Geleen, The Netherlands. Kevin.Theunissen@ggdzl.nl.
Christian HoebeDepartment of Sexual Health, Infectious Diseases and Environmental Health, South Limburg Public Health Services, 6160 HA, Geleen, The Netherlands. christian.hoebe@ggdzl.nl.
Gerjo KokDepartment of Work & Social Psychology, Maastricht University, 6200 MD Maastricht, The Netherlands. g.kok@maastrichtuniversity.nl.
Rik CrutzenDepartment of Health Promotion, School for Public Health and Primary Care (CAPHRI), Maastricht University Medical Centre (MUMC), Maastricht 6202 AZ, The Netherlands. rik.crutzen@maastrichtuniversity.nl.
Chakib Kara-ZaïtriFaculty of Engineering and Informatics. University of Bradford, Bradford BD7 1DP, UK. c.karazaitri@bradford.ac.uk.
Nanne de VriesDepartment of Health Promotion, School for Public Health and Primary Care (CAPHRI), Maastricht University Medical Centre (MUMC), Maastricht 6202 AZ, The Netherlands. n.devries@maastrichtuniversity.nl.
Jan van BergenCentre for Infectious Disease Control, RIVM National Institute of Public Health and the Environment, Bilthoven 3720 BA, The Netherlands. jan.van.Bergen@rivm.nl.
Robert HamiltonIn-Fact, Bradford BD17 7DB, UK. bob@in-fact.com.
Marianne van der SandeCentre for Infectious Disease Control, RIVM National Institute of Public Health and the Environment, Bilthoven 3720 BA, The Netherlands. marianne.van.der.sande@rivm.nl.
Nicole Dukers-MuijrersDepartment of Sexual Health, Infectious Diseases and Environmental Health, South Limburg Public Health Services, 6160 HA, Geleen, The Netherlands. christian.hoebe@ggdzl.nl.
Maastricht University Medical Centre · NLGGD Zuid Limburg · NLMaastricht University · NLNational Institute for Public Health and the Environment · NLUniversity Medical Center Utrecht · NLUniversity of Bradford · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundWith the aim of targeting high-risk hidden heterosexual young people for Chlamydia trachomatis (CT) testing, an innovative web-based screening strategy using Respondent Driven Sampling (RDS) and home-based CT testing, was developed, piloted and evaluated.

methodsTwo STI clinic nurses encouraged 37 CT positive heterosexual young people (aged 16-25 years), called index clients, to recruit peers from their social and sexual networks using the web-based screening strategy. Eligible peers (young, living in the study area) could request a home-based CT test and recruit other peers.

resultsTwelve (40%) index clients recruited 35 peers. Two of these peers recruited other peers (n = 7). In total, 35 recruited peers were eligible for participation; ten of them (29%) requested a test and eight tested. Seven tested for the first time and one (13%) was positive. Most peers were female friends (80%). Nurses were positive about using the strategy.

conclusionsThe screening strategy is feasible for targeting the hidden social network. However, uptake among men and recruitment of sex-partners is low and RDS stopped early. Future studies are needed to explore the sustainability, cost-effectiveness, and impact of strategies that target people at risk who are not effectively reached by regular health care.

Indexed as

InternetSexual PartnersSocial SupportAdolescentAdultChlamydia InfectionsChlamydia trachomatisCost-Benefit AnalysisFemaleHealth PromotionHumansMaleNetherlandsPilot ProjectsSocioeconomic FactorsYoung AdultChlamydia trachomatishome-based test kitspartner notificationpeer-referralsexual networkssocial networksweb-based respondent driven sampling

Identifiers

PMID26308015
PMCPMC4555318
OpenAlexW2132194819

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.