ArticleSexually transmitted infections2017
How can we objectively categorise partnership type? A novel classification of population survey data to inform epidemiological research and clinical practice.
Article in Sexually transmitted infections, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Optimising partner notification outcomes for bacterial sexually transmitted infections: a deliberative process and consensus, United Kingdom, 2019.Euro surveillance : bulletin Europeen sur les maladies transmissibles = European communicable disease bulletin · 2022Pooled it
- Spectrum of sexual partner types among adults screened for sexually transmitted infections in the Eastern Cape, South Africa.PloS one · 2025Article
- Going beyond 'regular and casual': development of a classification of sexual partner types to enhance partner notification for STIs.Sexually transmitted infections · 2022Article
- Ethnic variations in sexual partnerships and mixing, and their association with STI diagnosis: findings from a cross-sectional biobehavioural survey of attendees of sexual health clinics across England.Sexually transmitted infections · 2020Article
- Factors related to condomless anal intercourse between men who have sex with men: results from a European bio-behavioural survey.Journal of public health (Oxford, England) · 2020Article
- Sexual mixing in opposite-sex partnerships in Britain and its implications for STI risk: findings from the third National Survey of Sexual Attitudes and Lifestyles (Natsal-3).International journal of epidemiology · 2019Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundPartnership type is a determinant of STI risk; yet, it is poorly and inconsistently recorded in clinical practice and research. We identify a novel, empirical-based categorisation of partnership type, and examine whether reporting STI diagnoses varies by the resulting typologies.
methodsAnalyses of probability survey data collected from 15 162 people aged 16-74 who participated in Britain's third National Survey of Sexual Attitudes and Lifestyles were undertaken during 2010-2012. Computer-assisted self-interviews asked about participants' ≤3 most recent partners (N=14 322 partners/past year). Analysis of variance and regression tested for differences in partnership duration and perceived likelihood of sex again across 21 'partnership progression types' (PPTs) derived from relationship status at first and most recent sex. Multivariable regression examined the association between reporting STI diagnoses and partnership type(s) net of age and reported partner numbers (all past year).
resultsThe 21 PPTs were grouped into four summary types: 'cohabiting', 'now steady', 'casual' and 'ex-steady' according to the average duration and likelihood of sex again. 11 combinations of these summary types accounted for 94.5% of all men; 13 combinations accounted for 96.9% of all women. Reporting STI diagnoses varied by partnership-type combination, including after adjusting for age and partner numbers, for example, adjusted OR: 6.03 (95% CI 2.01 to 18.1) for men with two 'casual' and one 'now steady' partners versus men with one 'cohabiting' partner.
conclusionsThis typology provides an objective method for measuring partnership type and demonstrates its importance in understanding STI risk, net of partner numbers. Epidemiological research and clinical practice should use these methods and results to maximise individual and public health benefit.
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.