ArticleBMC public health2020
The characteristics of patients frequently tested and repeatedly infected with Chlamydia trachomatis in Southwest Limburg, the Netherlands.
Article in BMC public health, 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, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Chlamydia trachomatis-specific T Cell Immunity Reflects Widespread Exposure in South African Adolescents and Young Women.The Journal of infectious diseases · 2026Article
- Patterns of sexual behaviour associated with repeated chlamydia testing and infection in men and women: a latent class analysis.BMC public health · 2022Article
- Determinants and prediction ofFrontiers in public health · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundRepeat Chlamydia trachomatis (CT) infections are common. To better understand the characteristics of patients frequently infected with CT at our sexually transmitted infection (STI) care services, we assessed the differences between patients repeatedly infected with CT and those who repeatedly tested negative.
methodsIn this cross-sectional analysis of cohort data, we assessed individuals tested for CT at different STI care providers between 2011 and mid-2018 in Southwest Limburg, the Netherlands (n = 17,616). Patients with ≥2 repeat CT infections in the study period were categorized as "patients with repeat CT infections." Multivariable logistic regression analyses were performed for the binary outcome measure: patients with repeat CT infections versus patients who repeatedly tested negative (reference group). Additional analyses were performed for only the STI clinic population.
resultsPatients aged < 25 years (OR: 1.83; 95%CI:1.38-2.43), co-infected with HIV (OR: 2.07; 95%CI: 1.02-4.22) or co-infected with Neisseria gonorrhoeae (NG) (OR: 5.04; 95%CI: 3.33-7.63) had more repeat CT infections. In additional analyses among exclusively STI clinic visitors, patients with urogenital symptoms (OR: 2.17; 95%CI: 1.41-3.35), and patients notified for STIs (OR: 4.55; 95%CI: 3.17-6.54) had more frequent repeat CT infections.
conclusionsPatients aged < 25 years and patients coinfected with HIV or NG had more frequent repeat CT infections, accounting for ~ 20% of the diagnosed CT infections. These patients are likely at the highest risk for transmitting and acquiring CT. Therefore, testing and retesting this group remains important to enhance CT control.
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.