ArticleClinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America2020
More Screening or More Disease? Gonorrhea Testing and Positivity Patterns Among Men in 3 Large Clinical Practices in Massachusetts, 2010-2017.
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 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Trial
- Disseminated Gonococcal Infection Presenting as Isolated Septic Arthritis: A Case Report and Review of Literature.Cureus · 2024Article
- Electronic Health Record-Based Algorithm for Monitoring Respiratory Virus-Like Illness.Emerging infectious diseases · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
16 authors at 8 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundGonorrhea diagnosis rates in the United States increased by 75% during 2009-2017, predominantly in men. It is unclear whether the increase among men is being driven by more screening, an increase in the prevalence of disease, or both. We sought to evaluate changes in gonorrhea testing patterns and positivity among men in Massachusetts.
methodsThe analysis included men (aged ≥15 years) who received care during 2010-2017 in 3 clinical practice groups. We calculated annual percentages of men with ≥1 gonorrhea test and men with ≥1 positive result, among men tested. Log-binomial regression models were used to examine trends in these outcomes. We adjusted for clinical and demographic characteristics that may influence the predilection to test and probability of gonorrhea disease.
resultsOn average, 306 348 men had clinical encounters each year. There was a significant increase in men with ≥1 gonorrhea test from 2010 (3.1%) to 2017 (6.4%; adjusted annual risk ratio, 1.12; 95% confidence interval, 1.12-1.13). There was a significant, albeit lesser, increase in the percentage of tested men with ≥1 positive result (1.0% in 2010 to 1.5% in 2017; adjusted annual risk ratio, 1.07; 95% confidence interval, 1.04-1.09).
conclusionsWe estimated significant increases in the annual percentages of men with ≥1 gonorrhea test and men with ≥1 positive gonorrhea test result between 2010 and 2017. These results suggest that observed increases in gonorrhea rates could be explained by both increases in screening and the prevalence of gonorrhea.
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.