Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28703733›Full record

ArticleSexually transmitted diseases2017

US Public Sexually Transmitted Disease Clinical Services in an Era of Declining Public Health Funding: 2013-14.

Jami S Leichliter, Kate Heyer, Thomas A Peterman, Melissa A Habel, Kathryn A Brookmeyer, Stephanie S Arnold Pang, Mark R Stenger, Gretchen Weiss, Thomas L Gift

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Sexually transmitted diseases, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 35 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
35citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

35 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Medicaid Coverage of Sexually Transmitted Disease Service Visits.American journal of preventive medicine · 2019
    Article
  20. 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

9 authors.

Jami S LeichliterFrom the *Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, GA; †National Association of County and City Health Officials; and ‡National Coalition of STD Directors, Washington DC.
Kate Heyer
Thomas A Peterman
Melissa A Habel
Kathryn A Brookmeyer
Stephanie S Arnold Pang
Mark R Stenger
Gretchen Weiss
Thomas L Gift

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundWe examined the infrastructure for US public sexually transmitted disease (STD) clinical services.

methodsIn 2013 to 2014, we surveyed 331 of 1225 local health departments (LHDs) who either reported providing STD testing/treatment in the 2010 National Profile of Local Health Departments survey or were the 50 local areas with the highest STD cases or rates. The sample was stratified by jurisdiction population size. We examined the primary referral clinics for STDs, the services offered and the impact of budget cuts (limited to government funding only). Data were analyzed using SAS, and analyses were weighted for nonresponse.

resultsTwenty-two percent of LHDs cited a specialty STD clinic as their primary referral for STD services; this increased to 53.5% of LHDs when combination STD-family planning clinics were included. The majority of LHDs (62.8%) referred to clinics providing same-day services. Sexually transmitted disease clinics more frequently offered extragenital testing for chlamydia and/or gonorrhea (74.7%) and gonorrhea culture (68.5%) than other clinics (52.9%, 46.2%, respectively; P < 0.05). The majority of LHDs (61.5%) reported recent budget cuts. Of those with decreased budgets, the most common impacts were fewer clinic hours (42.8%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 24.4-61.2), reduced routine screening (40.2%; 95% CI, 21.7-58.8) and reductions in partner services (42.1%; 95% CI, 23.6-60.7). One quarter of those with reduced STD budgets increased fees or copays for clients.

conclusionsFindings demonstrate gaps and reductions in US public STD services including clinical services that play an important role in reducing disease transmission. Furthermore, STD clinics tended to offer more specialized STD services than other public clinics.

Indexed as

Delivery of Health CareFamily Planning ServicesBudgetsFemaleHumansMalePublic HealthReferral and ConsultationSexually Transmitted DiseasesSurveys and QuestionnairesUnited States

Identifiers

PMID28703733
PMCPMC5642112

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.