ArticleBMC infectious diseases2016
Leucocyte esterase dip-stick test as a point-of-care diagnostic for urogenital chlamydia in male patients: A multi-center evaluation in two STI outpatient clinics in Paramaribo and Amsterdam.
Article in BMC infectious diseases, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Point-of-care Tests for Chlamydia trachomatis and Neisseria gonorrhoeae: Review of the Literature.Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America · 2026Pooled it
- What is the best cutoff point of leukocyte esterase for diagnosis of periprosthetic joint infections? a systematic review and meta-analysis.Arthroplasty (London, England) · 2025Review
- Evaluation of the Predictive Value of Urine Leukocyte Esterase Test inFrontiers in medicine · 2022Article
- Descriptive Evaluation of Male Emergency Department Patients in the United States With Gonorrhea and Chlamydia.Cureus · 2020Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPoint-of-care (POC) tests are an important strategy to address the epidemic of sexually transmitted infections (STIs). The leucocyte esterase test (LET) can be used as a POC test for chlamydia. The aim of this study was to determine the diagnostic accuracy of the LET to detect urogenital chlamydia among men at STI clinics in Paramaribo, Suriname and Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
methodsRecruitment of patients took place in 2008-2010 in Suriname and in 2009-2010 in the Netherlands. Urine of patients was examined with the LET. The reference test was a nucleic acid amplification test (NAAT).
resultsWe included 412 patients in Suriname and 645 in the Netherlands. Prevalence of chlamydia in Suriname and the Netherlands was respectively 22.8 and 13.6 %. The sensitivity of the LET was 92.6 % (95 % CI = 85.3-97.0) and 77.3 % (95 % CI = 67.1-85.5) respectively, the specificity was 38.1 % (95 % CI = 32.7-43.6 %) and 58.1 % (95 % CI = 53.9-62.3) respectively. The positive predictive value was 30.6 % (95 % CI = 27.3-36.4) and 22.6 % (95 % CI = 18.0-27.7) respectively and the negative predictive value was 94.5 % (95 % CI = 89.1-97.8) and 94.2 % (95 % CI = 91.1-96.4) respectively. The kappa was respectively 0.179 and 0.176.
conclusionsTo diagnose urogenital chlamydia in men the LET performs poorly. It has a high negative but low positive predictive value. If the LET result is negative, chlamydia is accurately excluded, yet a positive result has a low predictive value. Whether the advantages of direct management based on LET outweigh the disadvantages of overtreatment is a subject for further studies.
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.