↓ Skip to main content

Cost-benefit analysis of Chlamydia trachomatis screening in pregnant women in a high burden setting in the United States

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Infectious Diseases, February 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (89th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (90th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
2 news outlets
policy
1 policy source
twitter
2 X users

Readers on

mendeley
75 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
Cost-benefit analysis of Chlamydia trachomatis screening in pregnant women in a high burden setting in the United States
Published in
BMC Infectious Diseases, February 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12879-017-2248-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jared Ditkowsky, Khushal H. Shah, Margaret R. Hammerschlag, Stephan Kohlhoff, Tamar A. Smith-Norowitz

Abstract

Chlamydia trachomatis is the most common bacterial sexually transmitted infection (STI) in the United States (U.S.) [1] and remains a major public health problem. We determined the cost- benefit of screening all pregnant women aged 15-24 for Chlamydia trachomatis infection compared with no screening. We developed a decision analysis model to estimate costs and health-related effects of screening pregnant women for C. trachomatis in a high burden setting (Brooklyn, NY). Outcome data was from literature for pregnant women in the 2015 US population. A virtual cohort of 6,444,686 pregnant women, followed for 1 year was utilized. Using outcomes data from the literature, we predicted the number of C. trachomatis cases, associated morbidity, and related costs. Two comparison arms were developed: pregnant women who received chlamydia screening, and those who did not. Costs and morbidity of a pregnant woman-infant pair with C. trachomatis were calculated and compared. Cost and benefit of screening relied on the prevalence of C. trachomatis; when rates are above 16.9%, screening was proven to offer net cost savings. At a pre-screening era prevalence of 8%, a screening program has an increased expense of $124.65 million ($19.34/individual), with 328 thousand more cases of chlamydia treated, and significant reduction in morbidity. At a current estimate of prevalence, 6.7%, net expenditure for screening is $249.08 million ($38.65/individual), with 204.63 thousand cases of treated chlamydia and reduced morbidity. Considering a high prevalence region, prenatal screening for C. trachomatis resulted in increased expenditure, with a significant reduction in morbidity to woman-infant pairs. Screening programs are appropriate if the cost per individual is deemed acceptable to prevent the morbidity associated with C. trachomatis.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 75 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 75 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 14 19%
Student > Bachelor 8 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 7%
Other 5 7%
Other 13 17%
Unknown 23 31%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 21 28%
Nursing and Health Professions 11 15%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 7%
Social Sciences 3 4%
Immunology and Microbiology 2 3%
Other 12 16%
Unknown 21 28%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 21. 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 15 February 2023.
All research outputs
#1,570,593
of 23,367,368 outputs
Outputs from BMC Infectious Diseases
#390
of 7,816 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#32,635
of 311,093 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Infectious Diseases
#15
of 181 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,367,368 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,816 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.3. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% 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 311,093 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 181 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its contemporaries.