Cited by 31Reproductive tract infections researchHealth Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of LifeCervical Cancer and HPV Research

Cost-effectiveness of opt-out chlamydia testing for high-risk young women in the U.S.

Open access
Owusu-Edusei, Kwame, Hoover, Karen W., Gift, Thomas L.·2016·American Journal of Preventive Medicine

Abstract

Introduction In spite of chlamydia screening recommendations, U.S. testing coverage continues to be low. This study explored the cost-effectiveness of a patient-directed, universal, opportunistic Opt-Out Testing strategy (based on insurance coverage, healthcare utilization, and test acceptance probabilities) for all women aged 15-24 years compared with current Risk-Based Screening (30% coverage) from a societal perspective.Methods Based on insurance coverage (80%); healthcare utilization (83%); and test acceptance (75%), the proposed Opt-Out Testing strategy would have an expected annual testing coverage of approximately 50% for sexually active women aged 15-24 years. A basic compartmental heterosexual transmission model was developed to account for population-level transmission dynamics. Two groups were assumed based on self-reported sexual activity. All model parameters were obtained from the literature. Costs and benefits were tracked over a 50-year period. The relative sensitivity of the estimated incremental cost-effectiveness ratios to the variables/parameters was determined. This study was conducted in 2014-2015.Results Based on the model, the Opt-Out Testing strategy decreased the overall chlamydia prevalence by >55% (2.7% to 1.2%). The Opt-Out Testing strategy was cost saving compared with the current Risk-Based Screening strategy. The estimated incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was most sensitive to the female pre-opt out prevalence, followed by the probability of female sequelae and discount rate.Conclusions The proposed Opt-Out Testing strategy was cost saving, improving health outcomes at a lower net cost than current testing. However, testing gaps would remain because many women might not have health insurance coverage, or not utilize health care.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.amepre.2016.01.007

Cites

57 of 57 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Cost-effectiveness analyses indicate that opt-out chlamydia screening among adolescent and young adult females might substantially increase screening, be cost-saving, and identify infections among patients who do not disclose sexual behavior.

    “Cost-effectiveness analyses indicate that opt-out chlamydia screening among adolescent and young adult females might substantially increase screening, be cost-saving (172), and identify infections among patients who do not disclose sexual behavior (173).”

    From Sexually Transmitted Infections Treatment Guidelines, 2021 (2021) · cites this paper as [172]

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

3 of the 60 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Owusu-Edusei, K., Hoover, K. W., & Gift, T. L.
Affiliations
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (US)
Venue
American Journal of Preventive Medicine
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2016-08
Volume
51
Issue
2
Pages
216-224
ISSN
0749-3797 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2291188718
Cited by
31
References
60
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 11 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 1
FWCI
2.04
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • American Journal of Preventive Medicine (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
National Institutes of Health (CC999999)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Immunology and Microbiology › Microbiology › Reproductive tract infections research
  • Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Health Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Cervical Cancer and HPV Research
Keywords
chlamydia screening, opt-out testing, cost-effectiveness, young women, risk-based screening, sexually transmitted infections, chlamydia prevalence, health insurance coverage, health care utilization, test acceptance, incremental cost-effectiveness ratio
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Chlamydia Infections, Chlamydia trachomatis, Cost-Benefit Analysis, Female, Humans, Mass Screening, Patient Acceptance of Health Care, Risk, United States, Prevalence, Young Adult

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review