Access

You are not currently logged in.

Access your personal account or get JSTOR access through your library or other institution:

login

Log in to your personal account or through your institution.

If You Use a Screen Reader

This content is available through Read Online (Free) program, which relies on page scans. Since scans are not currently available to screen readers, please contact JSTOR User Support for access. We'll provide a PDF copy for your screen reader.

Selective Screening for Chlamydial Infection In Women: A Comparison of Three Sets of Criteria

Jeanne M. Marrazzo, David Fine, Connie L. Celum, Susan DeLisle and H. Hunter Handsfield
Family Planning Perspectives
Vol. 29, No. 4 (Jul. - Aug., 1997), pp. 158-162
Published by: Guttmacher Institute
DOI: 10.2307/2953378
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2953378
Page Count: 5
  • Read Online (Free)
  • Download ($29.00)
  • Subscribe ($19.50)
  • Cite this Item
Since scans are not currently available to screen readers, please contact JSTOR User Support for access. We'll provide a PDF copy for your screen reader.
Selective Screening for Chlamydial Infection In Women: A Comparison of Three Sets of Criteria
Preview not available

Abstract

Selective screening has been associated with marked declines in the prevalence of chlamydial infection, the most common bacterial sexually transmitted disease (STD) in the United States. A comparison of the performance of different selective screening criteria in three groups of family planning and STD clinic clients shows that criteria recommended by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention performed well overall, detecting 88-89% of infections by screening 58-74% of women. Criteria based on age alone performed best among low-risk clients with a low prevalence of chlamydial infection, particularly when all women younger than age 25 were screened (sensitivity, 84-92%); the age-based criteria still required screening only 59-71% of all women. Selective screening criteria should be based on age, risk profile and chlamydia prevalence in specific clinical settings, and should be reevaluated as chlamydia prevalence declines.

Page Thumbnails

  • Thumbnail: Page 
158
    158
  • Thumbnail: Page 
159
    159
  • Thumbnail: Page 
160
    160
  • Thumbnail: Page 
161
    161
  • Thumbnail: Page 
162
    162