Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35287617›Full record

ReviewBMC infectious diseases2022

Controversies and evidence on Chlamydia testing and treatment in asymptomatic women and men who have sex with men: a narrative review.

Nicole H T M Dukers-Muijrers, Ymke J Evers, Christian J P A Hoebe, Petra F G Wolffs, Henry J C de Vries, Bernice Hoenderboom, Marianne A B van der Sande, Janneke Heijne, Jeffrey D Klausner, Jane S Hocking and 1 more

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in BMC infectious diseases, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed
5.6field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

20 citing papers in PubMed, 42 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Laboratory detection methods for Chlamydia trachomatis infection in children: a review.European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology · 2026
    Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Addressing Challenges inMedicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2024
    Review
  15. Trends inSexually transmitted infections · 2024
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Prevalence ofEpidemiology and infection · 2023
    Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors at 7 institutions in 5 countries.

Nicole H T M Dukers-MuijrersDepartment of Sexual Health, Infectious Diseases, and Environmental Health, South Limburg Public Health Service, PO Box 33, 6400 AA, Heerlen, The Netherlands. nicole.dukers@ggdzl.nl.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4896-758X
Ymke J EversDepartment of Sexual Health, Infectious Diseases, and Environmental Health, South Limburg Public Health Service, PO Box 33, 6400 AA, Heerlen, The Netherlands.
Christian J P A HoebeDepartment of Sexual Health, Infectious Diseases, and Environmental Health, South Limburg Public Health Service, PO Box 33, 6400 AA, Heerlen, The Netherlands.
Petra F G WolffsDepartment of Medical Microbiology, Care and Public Health Research Institute (CAPHRI), Maastricht University Medical Center (MUMC+), Maastricht, The Netherlands.
Henry J C de VriesEpidemiology and Surveillance Unit, Centre for Infectious Disease Control, National Institute of Public Health and the Environment (RIVM), Bilthoven, The Netherlands.
Bernice HoenderboomEpidemiology and Surveillance Unit, Centre for Infectious Disease Control, National Institute of Public Health and the Environment (RIVM), Bilthoven, The Netherlands.
Marianne A B van der SandeDepartment of Public Health, Institute of Tropical Medicine, Antwerp, Belgium.
Janneke HeijneEpidemiology and Surveillance Unit, Centre for Infectious Disease Control, National Institute of Public Health and the Environment (RIVM), Bilthoven, The Netherlands.
Jeffrey D KlausnerDepartment of Population and Public Health Sciences, Keck School of Medicine of the University of Southern California, Los Angeles, USA.
Jane S HockingMelbourne School of Population and Global Health, University of Melbourne, Parkville, Victoria, Australia.
Jan van BergenEpidemiology and Surveillance Unit, Centre for Infectious Disease Control, National Institute of Public Health and the Environment (RIVM), Bilthoven, The Netherlands.
Maastricht University · NLNational Institute for Public Health and the Environment · NLAidsfonds · NLMaastricht University Medical Centre · NLThe University of Melbourne · AUUniversity Medical Center Utrecht · NLUniversity of Southern California · US

Funding

ZonMw 50-53000-98-109ZonMw 52-2008-002
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundChlamydia trachomatis (CT) is the most common bacterial sexually transmitted infection (STI) worldwide. CT is mainly asymptomatic. Test-and-treat strategies are widely implemented to prevent transmission and complications. Strategies are not without controversy in asymptomatic women and men who have sex with men (MSM). Concerns are emerging to test and treat asymptomatic persons for urogenital CT ('Controversy 1') and pharyngeal or rectal CT ('Controversy 2'), whereby testing symptomatic persons is not under debate. Opposed views in CT treatment involve using azithromycin versus doxycycline ('Controversy 3'). The objective of this review is to provide coverage of these public health and clinical controversies by reviewing the current scientific evidence.

methodsA literature search was performed using PubMed for relevant publications between 2018 and September 2021, and iterative retrieval of additional relevant publications.

resultsControversy 1. In women, the majority of asymptomatic CT are at the urogenital site, and detections mostly include viable CT. CT easily transmits to a partner and potentially also between the vaginal and rectal areas; the clinical impact of urogenital CT is established, although risks for adverse outcomes are uncertain. Wide-scale testing in asymptomatic women has not resulted in reduced prevalence. In MSM, evidence for the clinical impact of asymptomatic urogenital CT is lacking. Controversy 2. Rectal CT is common in women diagnosed with urogenital CT, but the clinical impact of asymptomatic rectal CT is uncertain. In MSM, rectal CT is common, and most CT infections are at the rectal site, yet the risk of longer term complications is unknown. In both sexes, pharyngeal CT is uncommon and has no documented clinical impact. Controversy 3. In the treatment of rectal CT, doxycycline has superior effectiveness to azithromycin. Evidence has also accumulated on the harms of test-and-treat strategies.

conclusionsCurrent practices vary widely, from widescale test-and-treat approaches to more individual patient- and partner-level case management. Choosing which asymptomatic people to test at what anatomic site, and whether to test or not, requires an urgent (re-)definition of the goals of testing and treating asymptomatic persons. Treatment guidelines are shifting toward universal doxycycline use, and clinical practice now faces the challenge of implementation.

Indexed as

Chlamydia InfectionsGonorrheaSexual and Gender MinoritiesChlamydia trachomatisFemaleHomosexuality, MaleHumansMaleChlamydia trachomatisExtragenitalMen who have sex with menPharyngealRectalTestingTreatmentUrogenitalWomen

Identifiers

PMID35287617
PMCPMC8922931
OpenAlexW4220847044

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.