Cited by 48Reproductive tract infections researchHIV/AIDS Research and InterventionsCervical Cancer and HPV Research

Novel interventions to reduce re-infection in women with chlamydia: a randomized controlled trial.

Cameron, S.T., Glasier, A., Scott, G., Young, H., Melvin, L., Johnstone, A., Elton, R.·2009·Human Reproduction

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to determine whether postal testing kits (PTKs) or patient-delivered partner therapy (PDPT) for partners of women with Chlamydia trachomatis reduce re-infection rates in women, compared with partner notification by patient referral. METHODS: Three hundred and thirty women testing positive for chlamydia, at clinics for genitourinary medicine, family planning and termination of pregnancy in Edinburgh, were randomized to one of three partner interventions: patient referral, PTK (partners post urine for testing) or PDPT (1 g azithromycin for partners). Women submitted urine for chlamydia testing every 3 months. The primary outcome was re-infection assessed as time to first positive result by the Cox proportional hazard regression. The proportion of partners tested or treated with each intervention was determined. RESULTS: Out of 330 women, 215 (65%) were retested over 12 months. There were 32 of 215 women (15%) who retested positive (7, 15 and 10 women from the patient referral, PTK and PDPT groups, respectively). There was no significant difference in re-infection between PDPT versus patient referral (HR 1.32, 95% CI 0.50-3.56), PTK versus patient referral (HR 2.35, 95% CI 0.94-5.88) or PDPT versus PTK (HR 0.55, 95% CI 0.24-1.24). There was no significant difference in the proportion of partners confirmed tested/treated between the patient referral (34%) and PTK (41%, P = 0.32) or PDPT (42%, P = 0.28) groups. CONCLUSIONS: PTK and PDPT do not reduce re-infection rates in women with chlamydia compared with patient referral. However, PDPT may offer other advantages such as simplicity and cost compared with patient referral.

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 · 10.1093/humrep/den475

Cites

21 of 21 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?

  • A fourth trial in the United Kingdom did not demonstrate a difference in the risk for reinfection or in the numbers of partners treated between persons offered EPT and those advised to notify their sex partners.

    “A fourth trial in the United Kingdom did not demonstrate a difference in the risk for reinfection or in the numbers of partners treated between persons offered EPT and those advised to notify their sex partners (128).”

    From Sexually Transmitted Infections Treatment Guidelines, 2021 (2021) · cites this paper as [128]

  • Eleven studies compared expedited partner therapy versus simple patient referral among patients with chlamydial infection, trichomoniasis, gonorrhoea or chlamydia, HIV, herpes simplex virus-2, syphilis, or any STI syndrome.

    “Eleven studies compared EPT versus simple patient referral among patients with chlamydial infection (99, 113), trichomoniasis (89, 90), gonorrhoea or chlamydia (94, 95, 114-116), HIV, herpes simplex virus-2, syphilis, chlamydial infection, gonorrhoea (pharyngeal and anal) (117), or any STI syndrome (108).”

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

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. Honey E, Templeton A, McKenzie H, Flett G. Reinfection rate in women screening positive for Chlamydia trachomatis. Evidence, Policy, Practice. Public Health Research in Scotland, Royal Society of Edinburgh, 2002. Abstract p17, Conference Handbook.
  2. Schillinger JA, Kissinger P, Calvet H, Whittingtom WL, Ransom RL, Sternberg MR, Berman SM, Kent CK, Martin DH, oh MK et al. Patient-delivered partner treatment with azithromycin to prevent repeated Chlamydia trachomatis infection among women. Sex Transm Dis 2003;30:49 -56.
  3. Scott Lamontagne D, Baster K, Emmett L, Nichols T, Randall S, McLean L, Meredith P, Harinda V, Tobin JM, Underhill GJ et al. Incidence and re-infection rates of genital chlamydial infection among women aged 16-24 years attending general practice family planning and genitourinary medicine clinics in England: a prospective cohort study. Sex Transm Infect 2007;83:292 -303.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Cameron, S. T., Glasier, A., Scott, G., Young, H., Melvin, L., Johnstone, A., & Elton, R.
Affiliations
  • Edinburgh Royal Infirmary (GB)
  • University of Edinburgh (GB)
Venue
Human Reproduction
Published
2009-01-09
Volume
24
Issue
4
Pages
888-895
ISSN
  • 0268-1161 (ISSN-L)
  • 1460-2350
OpenAlex
W2126591146
Cited by
48
References
21
Citations by year
2024: 1 · 2023: 5 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 1 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 3 · 2014: 4 · 2013: 2 · 2012: 4
FWCI
7.35
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Human Reproduction (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Immunology and Microbiology › Microbiology › Reproductive tract infections research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Infectious Diseases › HIV/AIDS Research and Interventions
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Cervical Cancer and HPV Research
Keywords
chlamydia, Chlamydia trachomatis, reinfection, partner notification, patient-delivered partner therapy, referral, azithromycin, women, partner screening
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Anti-Bacterial Agents, Chlamydia Infections, Chlamydia trachomatis, Female, Humans, Middle Aged, Recurrence, Sexual Partners, Time Factors, Azithromycin, 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