ArticlePloS one2024
Testing for extragenital Neisseria gonorrhoeae and Chlamydia trachomatis: At-home pharyngeal and rectal self-swabs are non-inferior to those completed in healthcare settings.
Article in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- At-home specimen self-collection as an additional testing strategy for chlamydia and gonorrhoea: a systematic literature review and meta-analysis.BMJ global health · 2024Pooled it
- Advanced specificity and sensitivity studies relative to a research use only transcription-mediated amplification-based assay forJournal of clinical microbiology · 2025Article
- Approach to sexually transmitted infection testing for men who have sex with men.Canadian family physician Medecin de famille canadienReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThe rates of gonorrhea and chlamydia have been increasing in the years preceding the COVID19 pandemic. Because most gonorrhea and chlamydia infections are located in the oropharynx and rectum for men who have sex with men (MSM), and because at-home self-collected swabs for these infections are not licensed by Health Canada or the United States Food and Drug Administration, decreased accessed to in-person care during and since the COVID19 pandemic potentially means missed case findings.
objectivesTo evaluate the performance of at-home self-collected pharyngeal and rectal swabs for gonorrhea and chlamydia nucleic acid amplification testing. METHODOLOGY: All persons who contacted our Sexual Health Clinic and who had a clinical indication to complete oral and/or rectal swabs for gonorrhea and chlamydia were invited to complete at-home swabs in advance of their scheduled appointments. We mailed swabs and instructions to those who consented. Participants brought these swabs to their scheduled in clinic appointments, where we repeated the same swabs. All matching swabs were sent to the laboratory for analysis to determine concordance.
resultsFrom September 8, 2022 to July 18, 2023, we enrolled 296 eligible participants who provided 1184 swabs. For analysis, cancelled specimens and specimens with invalid results were excluded, leaving 1032 swabs for comparison. We identified 66 STI diagnoses in 47 unique participants. Overall accuracy was high (exceeding 99%), except for rectal chlamydia, which was 96.0%. While the performance of self-swabs for chlamydia was lower compared to gonorrhea, at-home swabs identified six chlamydia infections that were missed by in-clinic collected swabs (two pharyngeal, four rectal). Removing these six cases as "false positives" increased overall accuracy for chlamydia detection to 99.7% (pharyngeal) and 97.8% (rectal).
conclusionSelf-collected at-home swabs had good performance acceptable for gonorrhea and chlamydia nucleic acid amplification testing.
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.