Screening for Chlamydia trachomatis. The case for screening is made, but much detail remains to be worked out.

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

10 citing papers in PubMed.

1. Chlamydia screening in England: a qualitative study of the narrative behind the policy.BMC public health · 2012
   Article
2. Prevalence of urogenital Chlamydia trachomatis increases significantly with level of urbanisation and suggests targeted screening approaches: results from the first national population based study in the Netherlands.Sexually transmitted infections · 2005
   Article
3. Evidence based health policy report. Screening for genital chlamydial infection.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2000
   Article
4. Chlamydia trachomatis in primary care: knowledge and practice in Glasgow.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2000
   Article
5. Knowledge of Chlamydia trachomatis genital infection and its consequences in people attending a genitourinary medicine clinic.Sexually transmitted infections · 1999
   Article
6. A collaborative approach to management of chlamydial infection among teenagers seeking contraceptive care in a community setting.Sexually transmitted infections · 1999
   Article
7. Sexuality and health: the hidden costs of screening for Chlamydia trachomatis.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 1999
   Review
8. DNA methods should be used to detect Chlamydia trachomatis.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 1998
   Article
9. Screening for Chlamydia trachomatis. New methods are needed to assess the burden of illness from chlamydia.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 1998
   Article
10. A pilot project for chlamydia screening in adolescent females using self-testing: characteristics of participants and non-participants.Canadian journal of public health = Revue canadienne de sante publique
    Article

Corrections and comments

• Commented on by
  Screening for Chlamydia trachomatis. New methods are needed to assess the burden of illness from chlamydia.1998
• Commented on by
  Screening for Chlamydia trachomatis. Contacts attendance rate is 70% in Hertfordshire.1998
• Commented on by
  Screening for Chlamydia trachomatis. Genitourinary medicine clinics in Scotland give high priority to contact tracing.1998
• Commented on by
  Screening for Chlamydia trachomatis. New technologies enable screening to be carried out in schools and the community.1998
• Commented on by
  Screening for Chlamydia trachomatis. Screening for and treatment of chlamydial infection demand commitment.1998
• Comment on
  Britain launches pilot screening programme for chlamydia.1998

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

Abstract

PubMed holds no abstract for this paper.

Indexed as