ArticleJournal of clinical microbiology2022
Multicenter Comparison of Nucleic Acid Amplification Tests for the Diagnosis of Rectal and Oropharyngeal Chlamydia trachomatis and Neisseria gonorrhoeae Infections.
Article in Journal of clinical microbiology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Evaluation of the Rapid and Cartridge-Based STANDARD™ M10 STI Panel: Analytical and Clinical Performance for Multiplex STI Detection.Microorganisms · 2026Article
- Chlamydia and Gonorrhea Infections in Genital and Extragenital Samples Among Men and Women.Sexually transmitted diseases · 2025Article
- Advanced specificity and sensitivity studies relative to a research use only transcription-mediated amplification-based assay forJournal of clinical microbiology · 2025Article
- SARS-CoV-2 neutralizing antibody determination after vaccination using spectrophotometric measurement of lateral flow immunochromatography.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- A novel detection method based on MIRA-CRISPR/Cas13a-LFD targeting the repeated DNA sequence of Trichomonas vaginalis.Parasites & vectors · 2024Article
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 11 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
Research using nucleic acid amplification tests (NAATs) have repeatedly found rectal and oropharyngeal infections with Chlamydia trachomatis and Neisseria gonorrhoeae to be common and potentially more difficult to treat than genital infections. Unfortunately, public health and patient care efforts have been hampered by the lack of FDA-cleared NAATs with claims for anorectal or oropharyngeal samples. At the time of the initiation of this study, no commercially available assays had these claims. We formed a novel partnership among academic institutions and diagnostic manufacturers to address this public health need. From May 2018 through August 2019, we recruited 1108 women, 1256 men, and 26 transgender persons each of whom provided 3 anal and 3 oropharyngeal swab specimens. The 3 anal swabs were pooled into a single transport tube as were the 3 oropharyngeal swabs. The performance of each of three study assays was estimated by comparison to the composite result and relative to one another. Percent positivity for chlamydia was 5.9 and 1.2% from anal and oropharyngeal specimens, respectively, compared to 4.2 and 4.1% for gonorrhea. Sensitivity for chlamydia detection ranged from 81.0 to 95.1% and 82.8 to 100% for anal and oropharyngeal specimens, respectively. Gonorrhea sensitivity ranged from 85.9 to 99.0% and 74.0 to 100% for anal and oropharyngeal samples, respectively. Specificity estimates were ≥ 98.9% for all assays, organisms, and sample types. Although there was heterogeneity between sensitivity estimates, these assays offer better ability to detect extragenital infections than culture and potential solutions for providing appropriate sexual health care for populations in which these infections are of concern.
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.