Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31002729›Full record

ArticlePloS one2019

Chlamydia trachomatis bacterial load, estimated by Cq values, in urogenital samples from men and women visiting the general practice, hospital or STI clinic.

Juliën N A P Wijers, Christian J P A Hoebe, Geneviève A F S van Liere, Petra F G Wolffs, Nicole H T M Dukers-Muijrers

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing 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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Estimated effect of reduced asymptomatic testing on missedThe Lancet regional health. Europe · 2025
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Diagnosis of Chlamydia trachomatis genital infections in the era of genomic medicine.Brazilian journal of microbiology : [publication of the Brazilian Society for Microbiology] · 2021
    Review
  5. Article
  6. Cervical Cytology of Samples withBioMed research international · 2020
    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

5 authors.

Juliën N A P WijersDepartment of Medical Microbiology, Care and Public Health Research Institute (CAPHRI), Maastricht University Medical Center (MUMC+), AZ Maastricht, the Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0003-3772-6414
Christian J P A HoebeDepartment of Medical Microbiology, Care and Public Health Research Institute (CAPHRI), Maastricht University Medical Center (MUMC+), AZ Maastricht, the Netherlands.
Geneviève A F S van LiereDepartment of Medical Microbiology, Care and Public Health Research Institute (CAPHRI), Maastricht University Medical Center (MUMC+), AZ Maastricht, the Netherlands.
Petra F G WolffsDepartment of Medical Microbiology, Care and Public Health Research Institute (CAPHRI), Maastricht University Medical Center (MUMC+), AZ Maastricht, the Netherlands.
Nicole H T M Dukers-MuijrersDepartment of Medical Microbiology, Care and Public Health Research Institute (CAPHRI), Maastricht University Medical Center (MUMC+), AZ Maastricht, the Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe bacterial load of Chlamydia trachomatis (CT) is assumed to play a role in transmission and sequelae. We assessed urogenital CT cycle quantification (Cq) values, as an indicator for CT load, of men and women diagnosed by general practitioners (GPs), hospital physicians and the STI clinic.

methodsUrogenital CT-positive samples (n = 2,055 vaginal swabs, n = 77 cervical swabs, n = 1,519 urine samples and n = 19 urethral swabs) diagnosed by GPs, hospital physicians and the STI clinic from the Maastricht Medical Microbiology Laboratory were included (2012-2016). The outcome measure 'urogenital Cq values' was used as an inversely proportional measure for CT load. Among all patients, multivariate linear regression analyses were used to assess primary determinants for mean urogenital Cq values, stratified by sex. Additional clinical determinants were assessed among STI clinic patients.

resultsIn men, mean urogenital Cq values were similar between GPs, hospital physicians and the STI clinic (32.7 and 33.5 vs. 32.7; p>0.05). Women visiting the GP had lower urogenital Cq values than women visiting the STI clinic (30.2 vs. 30.9; p = <0.001). Women visiting the hospital had higher urogenital Cq values than women visiting the STI clinic (32.4 vs. 30.9; p = <0.001). Among STI clinic women, urogenital Cq values were lower in women with concurrent anorectal CT and in rectally untested women compared to anorectal CT-negative women (30.7 and 30.6 vs. 33.9; p = <0.001).

conclusionMen visiting different STI care providers had similar urogenital Cq values, which could be an indicator for similar CT loads. The lower Cq values of women visiting the GP compared to women visiting the STI clinic could be an indicator for higher CT loads and likely higher transmission potential. Notably, urogenital Cq values of STI clinic women were much lower (>3 Cq) when STI clinic women also had anorectal CT. This finding could indicate higher urogenital CT loads and likely higher chances of transmission and sequelae.

Indexed as

Bacterial LoadAdultAmbulatory CareAmbulatory Care FacilitiesChlamydia InfectionsChlamydia trachomatisFemaleGeneral PracticeHospitalsHumansMaleMiddle AgedSexually Transmitted DiseasesUrogenital SystemYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID31002729
PMCPMC6474615

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.