ArticleMicrobiology insights2019
Laboratory Detection of First and Repeat Chlamydia Cases Influenced by Testing Patterns: A Population-Based Study.
Article in Microbiology insights, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThe purpose of this study was to describe and explore potential driving factors of trends in reported chlamydia infections over time in Manitoba, Canada.
methodsSurveillance and laboratory testing data from Manitoba Health, Seniors and Active Living were analysed using SAS v9.4. Kaplan-Meier plots of time from the first to second chlamydia infection were constructed, and Cox proportional hazards regression was used to estimate the risk of second repeat chlamydia infections in males and females.
resultsOverall, the number of reported infections found mirrored the number of tests conducted. From 2008 to 2014, the number of first infections found among females decreased as the number of first tests conducted among females also decreased. Between 2008 and 2012, the number of repeat tests among females increased and was accompanied by an increase in the number of repeat positive results from 2009 to 2013. From 2008 to 2016, the number of repeat tests and repeat positive results increased steadily among males.
conclusionsChlamydia infection rates consistently included a subset composed of repeat infections. The number of cases identified appears to mirror testing volumes, drawing into question incidence calculations that do not include testing volumes. SUMMARY BOX: 1) What is the current understanding of this subject? Chlamydia incidence is high in Manitoba, particularly among young women and in northern Manitoba.2) What does this report add to the literature? This report suggests that incidence calculated using case-based surveillance data alone does not provide an accurate estimate of chlamydia incidence in Manitoba and is heavily influenced by testing patterns.3) What are the implications for public health practice? In general, improving testing rates in clinical practices as well as through the provision of rapid services in non-clinical venues could result in higher screening and treatment rates. In turn, this could lead to a better understanding of true disease occurrence.
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.