↓ Skip to main content

Prevalence of Chlamydia trachomatis infection in women, heterosexual men and MSM visiting HIV counselling institutions in North Rhine-Westphalia, Germany - should Chlamydia testing be scaled up?

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Infectious Diseases, October 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (69th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (76th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
8 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
10 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
51 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Prevalence of Chlamydia trachomatis infection in women, heterosexual men and MSM visiting HIV counselling institutions in North Rhine-Westphalia, Germany - should Chlamydia testing be scaled up?
Published in
BMC Infectious Diseases, October 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12879-016-1915-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Anne Lallemand, Viviane Bremer, Klaus Jansen, Stine Nielsen, Dieter Münstermann, Andreas Lucht, Carsten Tiemann

Abstract

Patients asking for a free anonymous HIV test may have contracted other sexually transmitted infections (STIs) such as Chlamydia trachomatis, yet Chlamydia prevalence in that population is unknown. This study aimed to assess the prevalence and factors associated with Chlamydia infection in patients seeking HIV testing at local public health authorities (LPHA) in order to evaluate whether Chlamydia testing should be routinely offered to them. We conducted a cross-sectional study among patients (≥18 years) attending 18 LPHA in North Rhine-Westphalia from November 2012 to September 2013. LPHA collected information on participants' socio-demographic characteristics, sexual and HIV testing behaviours, previous STI history and clinical symptoms. Self-collected vaginal swabs and urine (men) were analysed by Transcription-Mediated Amplification. We assessed overall and age-stratified Chlamydia prevalence and 95 % confidence intervals (95 % CI). Using univariate and multivariable binomial regression, we estimated adjusted prevalence ratios (aPR) to identify factors associated with Chlamydia infection. The study population comprised 1144 (40.5 %) women, 1134 (40.1 %) heterosexual men and 549 (19.4 %) men who have sex with men (MSM); median age was 30 years. Chlamydia prevalence was 5.3 % (95 % CI: 4.1-6.8 %) among women, 3.2 % (95 % CI: 2.2-4.4) in heterosexual men and 3.5 % (95 % CI: 2.1-5.4) in MSM. Prevalence was highest among 18-24 year-old women (9 %; 95 % CI: 5.8-13) and heterosexual men (5.7 %; 95 % CI: 3.0-9.8 %), respectively. Among MSM, the prevalence was highest among 30-39 year-olds (4.4 %; 95 % CI: 1.9-8.5 %). Among those who tested positive, 76.7 % of women, 75.0 % of heterosexual men and 84.2 % of MSM were asymptomatic. Among women, factors associated with Chlamydia infection were young age (18-24 years versus ≥ 40 years, aPR: 3.0, 95 % CI: 1.2-7.8), having had more than 2 partners over the past 6 months (ref.: one partner, aPR: 2.1, 95 % CI: 1.1-4.0) and being born abroad (aPR: 1.9, 95 % CI: 1.0-3.5). Among heterosexual men, young age was associated with Chlamydia infection (18-24 years versus ≥ 40 years, aPR: 4.1, 95 % CI: 1.3-13). Among MSM, none of the variables were associated with Chlamydia infection. LPHA offering HIV tests should consider offering routine Chlamydia testing to women under 30 years. Women with multiple partners and those born abroad may also be considered for routine testing. Our results also suggest offering routine Chlamydia testing to heterosexual men under 25 years old. For MSM, we cannot draw specific recommendations based on our study as we estimated the prevalence of urethral Chlamydia infection, leaving out rectal and pharyngeal infections.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 51 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 51 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 12 24%
Student > Bachelor 11 22%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 18%
Researcher 5 10%
Other 2 4%
Other 4 8%
Unknown 8 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 14 27%
Nursing and Health Professions 12 24%
Psychology 5 10%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 4%
Immunology and Microbiology 1 2%
Other 3 6%
Unknown 14 27%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 20 November 2016.
All research outputs
#4,258,990
of 15,918,484 outputs
Outputs from BMC Infectious Diseases
#1,249
of 5,796 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#90,331
of 295,959 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Infectious Diseases
#137
of 582 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 15,918,484 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 73rd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,796 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.8. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 295,959 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 582 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its contemporaries.