Cited by 55Reproductive tract infections researchHIV/AIDS Research and InterventionsHIV, TB, and STIs Epidemiology

A randomized controlled trial for reducing risks for sexually transmitted infections through enhanced patient-based partner notification.

Open access
Wilson, Tracey E., Hogben, Matthew, Malka, Edmond S., Liddon, Nicole, McCormack, William M., Rubin, Steve R., Augenbraun, Michael A.·2009·American Journal of Public Health

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: We sought to assess the effectiveness of approaches targeting improved sexually transmitted infection (STI) sexual partner notification through patient referral. METHODS: From January 2002 through December 2004, 600 patients with Neisseria gonorrhoeae or Chlamydia trachomatis were recruited from STI clinics and randomly assigned to either a standard-of-care group or a group that was counseled at the time of diagnosis and given additional follow-up contact. Participants completed an interview at baseline, 1 month, and 6 months and were checked at 6 months for gonorrhea or chlamydial infection via nucleic acid amplification testing of urine. RESULTS: Program participants were more likely to report sexual partner notification at 1 month (86% control, 92% intervention; adjusted odds ratio [AOR] = 1.8; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.02, 3.0) and were more likely to report no unprotected sexual intercourse at 6 months (38% control, 48% intervention; AOR = 1.5; 95% CI = 1.1, 2.1). Gonorrhea or chlamydial infection was detected in 6% of intervention and 11% of control participants at follow-up (AOR = 2.2; 95% CI = 1.1, 4.1), with greatest benefits seen among men (for gender interaction, P = .03). CONCLUSIONS: This patient-based sexual partner notification program can help reduce risks for subsequent STIs among urban, minority patients presenting for care at STI clinics.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.2105/ajph.2007.112128

Cites

39 of 39 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 40 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Wilson, T. E., Hogben, M., Malka, E. S., Liddon, N., McCormack, W. M., Rubin, S. R., & Augenbraun, M. A.
Affiliations
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (US)
Venue
American Journal of Public Health
Published
2009-04
Volume
99
Issue
S1
Pages
S104-S110
ISSN
  • 0090-0036 (ISSN-L)
  • 1541-0048
OpenAlex
W1990065983
Cited by
54
References
40
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 5 · 2013: 4 · 2012: 2
FWCI
5.76
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • American Journal of Public Health (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
  • SUNY Digital Repository Support (State University of New York System) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
Funders
U.S. Public Health Service (R30 CCR219136)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Immunology and Microbiology › Microbiology › Reproductive tract infections research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Infectious Diseases › HIV/AIDS Research and Interventions
  • Social Sciences › General Social Sciences › HIV, TB, and STIs Epidemiology
Keywords
sexually transmitted infections, Neisseria gonorrhoeae, Chlamydia trachomatis, gonorrhea, chlamydia, patient counseling, follow-up contact, unprotected sex, men, minority patients, STD clinics
MeSH terms
Adult, Chlamydia Infections, Chlamydia trachomatis, Female, Humans, Male, Neisseria gonorrhoeae, New York, Population Surveillance, Risk-Taking, United States, Confidence Intervals, Odds Ratio, Neisseriaceae Infections, Disease Notification, Risk Reduction Behavior

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