Impact of switching laboratory tests on reported trends in Chlamydia trachomatis infections

American Journal of Epidemiology

Volumn 151, Issue 4, 2000, Pages 430-435

  Dicker, Linda Webster ^a   Mosure, Debra J ^a,b   Levine, William C ^a   Black, Carolyn M ^a   Berman, Stuart M ^a  

^a CENTERS FOR DISEASE CONTROL AND PREVENTION   (United States)

^b CENTERS FOR DISEASE CONTROL AND PREVENTION   (United States)

Author keywords

Chlamydia; Chlamydia trachomatis; Laboratory techniques and procedures; Mass screening; Prevalence

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ANALYTIC METHOD; ARTICLE; CHLAMYDIA TRACHOMATIS; CHLAMYDIASIS; FEMALE; HUMAN; LABORATORY TEST; MASS SCREENING; PREVALENCE; UNITED STATES;

EID: 0034651510     PISSN: 00029262     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/oxfordjournals.aje.a010223     Document Type: Article

References (11)

1. Black CM. Current methods of laboratory diagnosis of Chlamvdia trachomatis infections. Clin Microbiol Rev 1997;10:160-84.
2. Lin JL, Jones WE, Yan L, et al. Underdiagnosis of Chlamydia trachomatis infection. Sex Transm Dis 1992;19:259-65.
3. Magder LS, Klontz KC, Bush LH, et al. Effect of patient characteristics on performance of an enzyme immunoassay for detecting cervical Chlamydia trachomatis infection. J Clin Microbiol 1990;28:781-4.
4. Barnes RC, Katz BP, Rolfs RT, et al. Quantitative culture of endocervical Chlamydia trachomatis. J Clin Microbiol 1990; 28:774-80.
5. Hillis S, Black C, Newhall J, et al. New opportunities for chlamydia prevention: applications of science to public health practice. Sex Transm Dis 1995;22:197-202.
6. Dicker LW, Mosure DJ, Levine WC. Chlamydia positivity versus prevalence: what's the difference? Sex Transm Dis 1998; 25:251-3.
7. Rogan WJ, Gladen B. Estimating prevalence from the results of a screening test. Am J Epidemiol 1978;107:71-6.
8. Johnson R, Black C, Green T. Summary of performance estimates of tests used to diagnose Chlamydia trachomatis infections of the female genito-urinary tract. Atlanta, GA: Workshop for Guidelines for the Laboratory Identification of Chlamydia trachomatis, March 27-28, 1997.
9. Newhall WJ, DeLisle S, Fine D, et al. Head-to-head evaluation of five different non-culture chlamydia tests relative to a quality-assured culture standard. Sex Transm Dis 1994;21: S165-6.
10. Hook EW, Spitters C, Reichart CA, et al. Use of cell culture and a rapid diagnostic assay for Chlamydia trachomatis screening. JAMA 1994;272:867-70.
11. DeLisle SJ, St. Louis M, Mosure D. Chlamydia and gonorrhea test volume in the US. Presented at the 12th Meeting, International Society of Sexually Transmitted Diseases Research, Seville, Spain, October 19-22, 1997.