ArticleSexual health2020
Sexually transmissible infection testing among pregnant women in the US, 2011-15.
Article in Sexual health, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- National Outpatient Sexually Transmitted Infection Testing in Pregnant Patients in the United States.Journal of women's health (2002) · 2024Article
- Adherence to Sexually Transmitted Infection Screening in Pregnancy.Journal of women's health (2002) · 2023Article
- Examining the Association Between Affordable Care Act Medicaid Expansion and Sexually Transmitted Infection Testing Among U.S. Women.Women's health issues : official publication of the Jacobs Institute of Women's HealthArticle
- Acceptability, feasibility, equity and resource use for prenatal screening for chlamydia and gonorrhea: A systematic review.Canada communicable disease report = Releve des maladies transmissibles au CanadaArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Introduction Sexually transmissible infections (STIs) are increasing in the US. Pregnant women and infants are susceptible to serious STI-related sequelae; however, some STIs can be cured during pregnancy with appropriate, timely screening.
methodsWe used data from the 2011-15 National Survey of Family Growth to examine STI testing (in the past 12 months) among women who were pregnant in the past 12 months (n = 1155). In bivariate and multivariable analyses, we examined associations between demographics, health care access and two outcome variables, namely receipt of a chlamydia test and receipt of other STI tests.
resultsAmong women who were pregnant in the past 12 months, 48% reported receiving a chlamydia test and 54% reported that they received an STI test other than chlamydia in the past 12 months. In adjusted analyses, non-Hispanic Black women were more likely to receive a chlamydia test (adjusted odds ratio (aOR) 2.82; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.86-4.26) and other STI tests (aOR 2.43; 95% CI 1.58-3.74) than non-Hispanic White women. Women living in a metropolitan statistical area but not the principal city were less likely to report chlamydia (aOR 0.62; 95% CI 0.44-0.86) and other STI (aOR 0.57; 95% CI 0.40-0.81) testing than women living in a principal city. Women born outside the US were significantly less likely to have received a chlamydia test (aOR 0.35; 95% CI 0.19-0.64) or other STI test (aOR 0.34; 95% CI 0.20-0.58), whereas those who had received prenatal care were more likely to receive a chlamydia test (aOR 2.10; 95% CI 1.35-3.28) or another STI test (aOR 2.32; 95% CI 1.54-3.49).
conclusionsThe findings suggest that interventions are needed to increase adherence to recommended STI screenings during pregnancy.
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.