Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26790411›Full record

ArticleBMC public health2016

Predictors of Chlamydia Trachomatis testing: perceived norms, susceptibility, changes in partner status, and underestimation of own risk.

Gill A Ten Hoor, Robert A C Ruiter, Jan E A M van Bergen, Christian J P A Hoebe, Nicole H T M Dukers-Muijrers, Gerjo Kok

Open access · goldAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in BMC public health, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
1.8field-weighted citation impact, top 11% 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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. 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

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Gill A Ten HoorDepartment of Work & Social Psychology, Maastricht University, P.O. Box 616, 6200 MD, Maastricht, The Netherlands. Gill.tenHoor@MaastrichtUniversity.nl.
Robert A C RuiterDepartment of Work & Social Psychology, Maastricht University, P.O. Box 616, 6200 MD, Maastricht, The Netherlands.
Jan E A M van BergenSTI AIDS Netherlands, Keizersgracht 390, 1016GB, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Christian J P A HoebeDepartment of Sexual Health, Infectious Disease and Environmental Health, Public Health Service South Limburg, P.O. Box 2022, 6160HA, Geleen, The Netherlands.
Nicole H T M Dukers-MuijrersDepartment of Sexual Health, Infectious Disease and Environmental Health, Public Health Service South Limburg, P.O. Box 2022, 6160HA, Geleen, The Netherlands.
Gerjo KokDepartment of Work & Social Psychology, Maastricht University, P.O. Box 616, 6200 MD, Maastricht, The Netherlands.
Maastricht University · NLUniversity of Amsterdam · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIt is hard to convince people to participate in chlamydia screening programs outside the clinical setting. In two earlier studies (BMC Public Health. 2013;13:1091; J Med Internet Res. 2014;16(1):e24), we identified explicit and implicit determinants of chlamydia screening behavior and attempted, unsuccessfully, to improve participation rates by optimizing the recruitment letter. In the present study, we examined the links between a number of social-cognitive determinants (e.g., stereotypical beliefs about a person with chlamydia, intentions, changes in partner status), and self-reported chlamydia testing behavior six months after the initial study.

methodsThe present study is a follow-up to our first study (T0). We assessed self-reported testing behavior 6 months after the first measure by means of an online questionnaire (T1; N = 269). Furthermore, at T1, we measured the social-cognitive determinants in more detail, and explored the influence of stereotypical beliefs and any changes in partner status during this six month period.

resultsIn total, 25 (9.1 %) of the participants tested for chlamydia at some point during the six months between baseline (T0) and follow up (T1). Testing behavior was influenced by testing intentions in combination with changes in risk behavior. The higher the participants' own numbers of partners ever, the higher they estimated the number of partners of the stereotypical person with chlamydia. Testing intentions were most strongly predicted by perceived norms and susceptibility, and having had multiple partners in the last 6 months (R(2) = .41).

conclusionThe most relevant determinants for testing intentions and behavior were susceptibility, subjective norms and changes in partner status. We found a systematic tendency for individuals to underestimate their own risk, especially the risk of inconsistent condom use. Future research should focus on more promising alternatives to population-based interventions, such as online interventions, screening in primary care, the rescreening of positives, and clinic-based interventions. This future research should also focus on making testing easier and reducing barriers to testing, as well as using social and sexual networks in order to reach more people.

Indexed as

Risk AssessmentSocial NormsAdolescentAdultAmbulatory Care FacilitiesChlamydia InfectionsChlamydia trachomatisFemaleHealth Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticeHumansIntentionMalePatient Acceptance of Health CareRisk-TakingSexual BehaviorYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID26790411
PMCPMC4719691
OpenAlexW2258897329

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.