ArticleNursing for women's health2025
A Scoping Review of Approaches to Extragenital Chlamydia and Gonorrhea Screening for Adolescents and Young Adults in the United States.
Article in Nursing for women's health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
objectiveTo identify effective strategies for extragenital sexually transmitted infection screening among adolescents and young adults (AYAs). DATA SOURCES: Following the Joanna Briggs Institute method, searches were conducted in PubMed and the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL) for relevant, peer-reviewed articles published from January 2000 through December 2024. STUDY SELECTION: The search strategy identified studies pertaining to chlamydia, gonorrhea, extragenital sites, screening, and AYAs. Studies were included if most participants were 12 to 24 years old or if their outcomes were disaggregated. Selected studies described at least one approach to extragenital screening, reporting corresponding measures of uptake, preferability, or acceptability. Nine studies met the inclusion criteria. DATA EXTRACTION: Data on study characteristics, sampled populations, approaches, relative successes, infection prevalence, and correlates were extracted, critically appraised, and descriptively synthesized. DATA SYNTHESIS: Included studies demonstrated higher extragenital screening uptake in research studies (89%-100%) compared to routine care (0%-74%) and when standardized protocols and health care staff trainings were incorporated. Extragenital infections were prevalent among female AYAs with genital infection, as well as sexual and gender minority individuals assigned male at birth.
conclusionIncreasing clinical standardization as well as enhancing health care and nursing staff training may improve detection of common extragenital infections and help prevent associated sexual and reproductive health complications.
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.