ArticleJournal of Korean medical science2026
Expert Consensus Study on the Redesign of the Sexually Transmitted Infection Surveillance System in Korea.
Article in Journal of Korean medical science, 2026. 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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe management of sexually transmitted infections (STIs) at the national level is necessary for the health and well-being of individuals in society. The purpose of this study was to propose a redesign of the STI surveillance system by collecting opinions from experts.
methodsAfter the major STIs were reviewed, 1) gonorrhea, 2) chancroid, 3)
resultsThe experts agreed upon the exclusion of surveillance for chancroid on the basis of the low incidence, with an agreement rate of 83%. The experts agreed upon the inclusion of
conclusionAlthough a consensus was not reached in some of the surveys in this study, it involved the collection of various expert opinions. Therefore, policies should be promoted with a prioritized focus on items with high agreement, but items for which no consensus was reached need to be reviewed in greater depth through additional research and investigation.
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.