ArticleClinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America2020
Potential for Point-of-Care Tests to Reduce Chlamydia-associated Burden in the United States: A Mathematical Modeling Analysis.
Article in Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.
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
12 citing papers in PubMed.
- Long-Term Dynamics of Pelvic Inflammatory Disease Attributable toInternational journal of women's health · 2026Article
- STI point-of care tests: a call for quality-assured evaluation, implementation, innovation, and investment in future technologies.BMC infectious diseases · 2025Article
- Heterogeneity in practitioner-reported barriers to use, cost considerations and priorities for point of care sexually transmitted infection tests on surveys across seven years.International journal of STD & AIDS · 2023Article
- Controversies and evidence on Chlamydia testing and treatment in asymptomatic women and men who have sex with men: a narrative review.BMC infectious diseases · 2022Review
- What can be learnt from a qualitative evaluation of implementing a rapid sexual health testing, diagnosis and treatment service?BMJ open · 2021Article
- A profile of the binx healthExpert review of molecular diagnostics · 2021Review
- Development and Evaluation of a Point-of-Care Test in a Low-Resource Setting with High Rates of Chlamydia trachomatis Urogenital Infections in Fiji.Journal of clinical microbiology · 2021Article
- Overcoming Challenges with the Adoption of Point-of-Care Testing: From Technology Push and Clinical Needs to Value Propositions.Point of care · 2020Article
- Point-by-Point Progress: Gonorrhea Point of Care Tests.Expert review of molecular diagnostics · 2020Article
- Evaluation of the Performance of a Point-of-Care Test for Chlamydia and Gonorrhea.JAMA network open · 2020Article
- The Potential Population-Level Impact of Different Gonorrhea Screening Strategies in Baltimore and San Francisco: An Exploratory Mathematical Modeling Analysis.Sexually transmitted diseases · 2020Article
- A Decade of the National Center for HIV, Viral Hepatitis, STD, and TB Prevention's Epidemiologic and Economic Modeling Agreement.Public health reports (Washington, D.C. : 1974)Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundPoint-of-care testing (POCT) assays for chlamydia are being developed. Their potential impact on the burden of chlamydial infection in the United States, in light of suboptimal screening coverage, remains unclear.
methodsUsing a transmission model calibrated to data in the United States, we estimated the impact of POCT on chlamydia prevalence, incidence, and chlamydia-attributable pelvic inflammatory disease (PID) incidence, assuming status quo (Analysis 1) and improved (Analysis 2) screening frequencies. We tested the robustness of results to changes in POCT sensitivity, the proportion of patients getting treated immediately, the baseline proportion lost to follow-up (LTFU), and the average treatment delay.
resultsIn Analysis 1, high POCT sensitivity was needed to reduce the chlamydia-associated burden. With a POCT sensitivity of 90%, reductions from the baseline burden only occurred in scenarios in which over 60% of the screened individuals would get immediate treatment and the baseline LTFU proportion was 20%. With a POCT sensitivity of 99% (baseline LTFU 10%, 2-week treatment delay), if everyone were treated immediately, the prevalence reduction was estimated at 5.7% (95% credible interval [CrI] 3.9-8.2%). If only 30% of tested persons would wait for results, the prevalence reduction was only 1.6% (95% CrI 1.1-2.3). POCT with 99% sensitivity could avert up to 12 700 (95% CrI 5000-22 200) PID cases per year, if 100% were treated immediately (baseline LTFU 20% and 3-week treatment delay). In Analysis 2, when POCT was coupled with increasing screening coverage, reductions in the chlamydia burden could be realized with a POCT sensitivity of 90%.
conclusionsPOCT could improve chlamydia prevention efforts if test performance characteristics are significantly improved over currently available options.
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.