ReviewSexually transmitted diseases2018
The Use of Technology for Sexually Transmitted Disease Partner Services in the United States: A Structured Review.
Review 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 16 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
16 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Disease Intervention Specialist-Delivered Interventions and Other Partner Services for HIV and Sexually Transmitted Infections: A Systematic Review.American journal of preventive medicine · 2025Pooled it
- Sexually Transmitted Infections Treatment Guidelines, 2021.MMWR. Recommendations and reports : Morbidity and mortality weekly report. Recommendations and reports · 2021Guideline
- Initial and Subsequent Engagement of Recently Diagnosed Persons Living with HIV in Contact Tracing Interviews Conducted by Public Health Practitioners.AIDS and behavior · 2025Article
- The effect of sexually transmitted disease education via instagram on the knowledge and attitudes of university students: a pilot study.Revista da Associacao Medica Brasileira (1992) · 2025Article
- Digital interventions for STI and HIV partner notification: a scoping review.Sexually transmitted infections · 2024Article
- Mobile Phone-Based Confidential Social Network Referrals for HIV Testing (CONSORT): Protocol for a Randomized Controlled Trial.JMIR research protocols · 2024Article
- Electronic Partner Notification for Sexually Transmitted Infections: A Qualitative Assessment of Patient, Clinical Staff, and State Field Epidemiologist Perspectives.AIDS patient care and STDs · 2024Article
- Building a Simple Model to Assess the Impact of Case Investigation and Contact Tracing for Sexually Transmitted Diseases: Lessons From COVID-19.AJPM focus · 2024Article
- Measuring Success: Disease Intervention Specialists Performance Metrics and Outcome Assessments.Sexually transmitted diseases · 2023Article
- Time From HIV Infection to Diagnosis in the U.S., 2014-2018.American journal of preventive medicine · 2021Article
- COVID-19 Case Investigation and Contact Tracing in Central Washington State, June-July 2020.Journal of community health · 2021Observational
- Establishing Best Practices in a Response to an HIV Cluster: An Example From a Surge Response in West Virginia.Sexually transmitted diseases · 2021Article
- Acceptability of Using Geosocial Networking Applications for HIV/Sexually Transmitted Disease Partner Notification and Sexual Health Services.Sexually transmitted diseases · 2020Article
- Differences in maternal characteristics and pregnancy outcomes between syphilitic women with and without partner coinfection.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2019Article
- Advances in Precision Health and Emerging Diagnostics for Women.Journal of clinical medicine · 2019Review
- HIV Testing in 50 Local Jurisdictions Accounting for the Majority of New HIV Diagnoses and Seven States with Disproportionate Occurrence of HIV in Rural Areas, 2016-2017.MMWR. Morbidity and mortality weekly report · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundSince the late 1990s, health departments and sexually transmitted disease (STD) programs throughout the United States have used technologies, such as the Internet and mobile phones, to provide services to persons with a sexually transmitted infection, including human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), and their sex partners, also known as partner services. This study reviewed the published literature to assess and compare partner services outcomes as a result of using technology and to calculate cost savings through cases averted.
methodsWe conducted a structured literature review of all US studies that examined the use of technology to notify persons exposed to an STD (syphilis, chlamydia, gonorrhea), including HIV, by health care professionals in the United States from 2000 to 2017. Outcome measures, including the number of partners notified, screened or tested; and new positives identified, were captured and cost savings were calculated, when data were available.
resultsSeven studies were identified. Methods used for partner services differed across studies, although email was the primary mode in 6 (83%) of the 7 studies. Only 2 of the 7 studies compared use of technology for partner services to traditional partner services. Between 10% and 97% of partners were successfully notified of their exposure through the use of technology and between 34% and 81% were screened or tested. Five studies reported on new infections identified, which ranged from 3 to 19. Use of technology for partner serves saved programs between US $22,795 and US $45,362 in direct and indirect medical costs.
conclusionsUse of technology for partner services increased the number of partners notified, screened or tested, and new infections found. Importantly, the use of technology allowed programs to reach partners who otherwise would not have been notified of their exposure to an STD or HIV. Improved response times and time to treatment were also seen as was re-engagement into care for previous HIV positive patients. Data and outcome measures across the studies were not standardized, making it difficult to generalize conclusions. Although not a replacement for traditional partner services, the use of technology enhances partner service outcomes.
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.