Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30284525›Full record

ArticleEpidemiology and infection2018

Repeated

K Gupta, R K Bakshi, B Van Der Pol, G Daniel, L Brown, C G Press, R Gorwitz, J Papp, J Y Lee, W M Geisler

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Epidemiology and infection, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing 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

11 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Viral Vector-BasedVaccines · 2024
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. 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

10 authors.

K GuptaDivision of Infectious Diseases, Department of Medicine, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3672-839X
R K BakshiDivision of Infectious Diseases, Department of Medicine, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, USA.
B Van Der PolDivision of Infectious Diseases, Department of Medicine, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, USA.
G DanielDivision of Infectious Diseases, Department of Medicine, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, USA.
L BrownDivision of Infectious Diseases, Department of Medicine, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, USA.
C G PressDivision of Infectious Diseases, Department of Medicine, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, USA.
R GorwitzCenters for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, GA, USA.
J PappCenters for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, GA, USA.
J Y LeeDepartment of Biostatistics, University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences, Little Rock, AR, USA.
W M GeislerDivision of Infectious Diseases, Department of Medicine, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, USA.

Funding

The UAB Sexually Transmitted Infections Cooperative Research Centers (STI CRC)U19AI113212 · NIAID · UNIVERSITY OF ALABAMA AT BIRMINGHAM · PI GEISLER, WILLIAM M · 2014 to 2018
$10.0M
Mechanisms and Correlates of Immune Protection against Genital Chlamydia in HumansR01AI093692 · NIAID · UNIVERSITY OF ALABAMA AT BIRMINGHAM · PI GEISLER, WILLIAM M · 2012 to 2023
$4.5M
CITY Health II Center for the Study of Community HealthU48DP005037 · DP · UNIVERSITY OF ALABAMA AT BIRMINGHAM · PI MICHAEL, MAX · 2014 to 2018
$4.4M
ACL HHS U48DP005037NCCDPHP CDC HHS U48 DP005037NIAID NIH HHS R01 AI093692NIAID NIH HHS U19 AI113212
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Chlamydia trachomatis (CT) infections remain highly prevalent. CT reinfection occurs frequently within months after treatment, likely contributing to sustaining the high CT infection prevalence. Sparse studies have suggested CT reinfection is associated with a lower organism load, but it is unclear whether CT load at the time of treatment influences CT reinfection risk. In this study, women presenting for treatment of a positive CT screening test were enrolled, treated and returned for 3- and 6-month follow-up visits. CT organism loads were quantified at each visit. We evaluated for an association of CT bacterial load at initial infection with reinfection risk and investigated factors influencing the CT load at baseline and follow-up in those with CT reinfection. We found no association of initial CT load with reinfection risk. We found a significant decrease in the median log10 CT load from baseline to follow-up in those with reinfection (5.6 CT/ml vs. 4.5 CT/ml; P = 0.015). Upon stratification of reinfected subjects based upon presence or absence of a history of CT infections prior to their infection at the baseline visit, we found a significant decline in the CT load from baseline to follow-up (5.7 CT/ml vs. 4.3 CT/ml; P = 0.021) exclusively in patients with a history of CT infections prior to our study. Our findings suggest repeated CT infections may lead to possible development of partial immunity against CT.

Indexed as

Bacterial loadChlamydia trachomatisinfectious diseasesexually transmitted infections (STIs)

Identifiers

PMID30284525
PMCPMC6447480

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.