ArticleSexually transmitted diseases2018
Prospective Evaluation of Cervicovaginal Self- and Cervical Physician Collection for the Detection of Chlamydia trachomatis, Neisseria gonorrhoeae, Trichomonas vaginalis, and Mycoplasma genitalium Infections.
Article in Sexually transmitted diseases, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 2 of them syntheses 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
13 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Systematic review and meta-analysis of the global prevalence and infection risk factors of Trichomonas vaginalis.Parasite (Paris, France) · 2025Pooled it
- Accuracy of self-collected versus healthcare worker collected specimens for diagnosing sexually transmitted infections in females: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis.Scientific reports · 2024Pooled it
- Trial
- A Narrative Review of Remote Biospecimen Collection Product and Implementation Considerations for Sexual Health Clinical Research.AIDS and behavior · 2026Review
- Multicenter Clinical Performance Evaluation of the NeuMoDx CT/NG Assay 2.0.Sexually transmitted diseases · 2025Article
- [Contribution of qPCR to the diagnosis of cervico-vaginal infections at the Hôpital Principal de Dakar, Senegal].Medecine tropicale et sante internationale · 2024Article
- Community pharmacies: Key players in point-of-care diagnostics for STI screening in Africa.PloS one · 2024Article
- Mapping Evidence of Self-Sampling to Diagnose Sexually Transmitted Infections in Women: A Scoping Review.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Controversies and evidence on Chlamydia testing and treatment in asymptomatic women and men who have sex with men: a narrative review.BMC infectious diseases · 2022Review
- Comparison of Different Self-Sampling Devices for Molecular Detection of Human Papillomavirus (HPV) and Other Sexually Transmitted Infections (STIs): A Pilot Study.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Acceptability and efficacy of vaginal self-sampling for genital infection and bacterial vaginosis: A cross-sectional study.PloS one · 2021Article
- Development of a convenient detection method for Trichomonas vaginalis based on loop-mediated isothermal amplification targeting adhesion protein 65.BMC infectious diseases · 2020Article
- Home Self-Collection by Mail to Test for Human Papillomavirus and Sexually Transmitted Infections.Obstetrics and gynecology · 2018Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThis study aimed to examine the agreement between sexually transmitted infection (STI) screening using self-collected specimens and physician-collected specimens, and to investigate the acceptability of self-collection for screening in an 18-month study of female sex workers in a high-risk, low-resource setting.
methodsA total of 350 female sex workers in Nairobi, Kenya, participated in a prospective study from 2009 to 2011. Women self-collected a cervicovaginal specimen. Next, a physician conducted a pelvic examination to obtain a cervical specimen. Physician- and self-collected specimens were tested for Chlamydia trachomatis, Neisseria gonorrhoeae, Trichomonas vaginalis, and Mycoplasma genitalium (MG) using Aptima nucleic acid amplification assays (Hologic). Specimens were collected at 3-month intervals over 18-month follow-up. κ Statistics measured agreement of positivity between self-collection and physician collection.
resultsBaseline STI prevalence was 2.9% for N. gonorrhoeae, 5.2% for C. trachomatis, 9.2% for T. vaginalis, and 20.1% for MG in self-collected samples, and 2.3%, 3.7%, 7.2%, and 12.9%, respectively, in physician-collected samples. κ Agreement was consistently strong (range, 0.66-1.00) for all STIs over the 18-month study period, except for MG, which had moderate agreement (range, 0.50-0.75). Most participants found self-collection easy (94%) and comfortable (89%) at baseline, with responses becoming modestly more favorable over time.
conclusionsSelf-collected specimen screening results showed strong agreement to clinical-collected specimens, except for MG, which was consistently detected more commonly in self-collected than in physician-collected specimens. Acceptability of the self-collection procedure was high at baseline and increased modestly over time. In high-risk, low-resource settings, STI screening with self-collected specimens provides a reliable and acceptable alternative to screening with physician-collected specimens.
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.