ArticlePublic health2017
State-level gonorrhea rates and expedited partner therapy laws: insights from time series analyses.
Article in Public health, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
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
Abstract
objectiveIn this study, we examined state-level monthly gonorrhea morbidity and assessed the potential impact of existing expedited partner therapy (EPT) laws in relation to the time that the laws were enacted. STUDY
designLongitudinal study.
methodsWe obtained state-level monthly gonorrhea morbidity (number of cases/100,000 for males, females and total) from the national surveillance data. We used visual examination (of morbidity trends) and an autoregressive time series model in a panel format with intervention (interrupted time series) analysis to assess the impact of state EPT laws based on the months in which the laws were enacted.
resultsFor over 84% of the states with EPT laws, the monthly morbidity trends did not show any noticeable decreases on or after the laws were enacted. Although we found statistically significant decreases in gonorrhea morbidity within four of the states with EPT laws (Alaska, Illinois, Minnesota, and Vermont), there were no significant decreases when the decreases in the four states were compared contemporaneously with the decreases in states that do not have the laws.
conclusionWe found no impact (decrease in gonorrhea morbidity) attributable exclusively to the EPT law(s). However, these results do not imply that the EPT laws themselves were not effective (or failed to reduce gonorrhea morbidity), because the effectiveness of the EPT law is dependent on necessary intermediate events/outcomes, including sexually transmitted infection service providers' awareness and practice, as well as acceptance by patients and their partners.
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.