ArticleJournal of applied history2020
Vicious Habits: Sexually Transmitted Infections among Black and White Union Army Veterans.
Article in Journal of applied history, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Impact of war-associated factors on spread of sexually transmitted infections: a systemic review.Frontiers in public health · 2024Pooled it
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.
Funding
Abstract
We analyze a random sample of 15,049 white veterans and 5,329 black veterans of the US Civil War examined by physicians between 1890 and 1906. We calculate a period prevalence of STI of 1.2-1.7% among whites and 4.2-8.0% among blacks, even though blacks and whites had almost identical prevalence of STIs in their wartime medical records. Furthermore, we find evidence that Board physicians were on the lookout for STIs among black veterans that could be used to justify denial of pension support. With or without STIs, blacks were rejected at roughly twice the rate of whites during this time period. Currently, racial disparities are even higher today than in this historical period, with blacks currently having a 5-15 times higher incidence than whites. We invite a critical reflection upon practices of screening and measurement systems to assess properly the degree to which racial prejudice may be part of these systems.
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.