Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31068656›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2019

Assessing local chlamydia screening performance by combining survey and administrative data to account for differences in local population characteristics.

Nathan Green, Ellie Sherrard-Smith, Clare Tanton, Pam Sonnenberg, Catherine H Mercer, Peter J White

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

6 authors.

Nathan GreenMRC Centre Global Infectious Disease Analysis, Department of Infectious Disease Epidemiology, School of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine, Imperial College London, Norfolk Place, London, W2 1PG, UK. nathan.green@imperial.ac.uk.
Ellie Sherrard-SmithMRC Centre Global Infectious Disease Analysis, Department of Infectious Disease Epidemiology, School of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine, Imperial College London, Norfolk Place, London, W2 1PG, UK.
Clare TantonCentre for Population Research in Sexual Health & HIV, Institute for Global Health, University College London, Mortimer Market Centre, off Capper Street, London, WC1E 6JB, UK.
Pam SonnenbergCentre for Population Research in Sexual Health & HIV, Institute for Global Health, University College London, Mortimer Market Centre, off Capper Street, London, WC1E 6JB, UK.
Catherine H MercerCentre for Population Research in Sexual Health & HIV, Institute for Global Health, University College London, Mortimer Market Centre, off Capper Street, London, WC1E 6JB, UK.
Peter J WhiteMRC Centre Global Infectious Disease Analysis, Department of Infectious Disease Epidemiology, School of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine, Imperial College London, Norfolk Place, London, W2 1PG, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6644-3512

Funding

Medical Research Council G0701757Medical Research Council MR/R015600/1Wellcome TrustWellcome Trust 084840
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Reducing health inequalities requires improved understanding of the causes of variation. Local-level variation reflects differences in local population characteristics and health system performance. Identifying low- and high-performing localities allows investigation into these differences. We used Multilevel Regression with Post-stratification (MRP) to synthesise data from multiple sources, using chlamydia testing as our example. We used national probability survey data to identify individual-level characteristics associated with chlamydia testing and combined this with local-level census data to calculate expected levels of testing in each local authority (LA) in England, allowing us to identify LAs where observed chlamydia testing rates were lower or higher than expected, given population characteristics. Taking account of multiple covariates, including age, sex, ethnicity, student and cohabiting status, 5.4% and 3.5% of LAs had testing rates higher than expected for 95% and 99% posterior credible intervals, respectively; 60.9% and 50.8% had rates lower than expected. Residual differences between observed and MRP expected values were smallest for LAs with large proportions of non-white ethnic populations. London boroughs that were markedly different from expected MRP values (≥90% posterior exceedance probability) had actively targeted risk groups. This type of synthesis allows more refined inferences to be made at small-area levels than previously feasible.

Indexed as

ChlamydiaHealthcare DisparitiesAdolescentBayes TheoremBlack PeopleChlamydia InfectionsEthnicityFemaleHumansLondonMaleMass ScreeningRisk FactorsSurveys and QuestionnairesWhite PeopleYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID31068656
PMCPMC6506589

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.