Impact of cervical cancer screening guidelines on screening for chlamydia

Allison Ursu, Ananda Sen, Mack Ruffin

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

7 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

The highest prevalence of chlamydia infection in the United States is among people aged 15 to 24 years. We assessed the impact of not doing routine cervical cancer screening on the rates of chlamydia screening in women aged 15 to 21 years. We classified visits to family medicine ambulatory clinics according to their timing relative to the 2009 guideline change that led to more restrictive cervical cancer screening. Women had higher odds of being screened for chlamydia before vs after the guideline change (odds ratio = 13.97; 95% CI, 9.17-21.29; P <.001). Chlamydia and cervical cancer screening need to be uncoupled and new screening opportunities should be identified.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)361-363
Number of pages3
JournalAnnals of family medicine
Volume13
Issue number4
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 1 2015

Fingerprint

Chlamydia
Early Detection of Cancer
Uterine Cervical Neoplasms
Guidelines
Chlamydia Infections
Odds Ratio
Medicine

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Family Practice

Cite this

@article{cf51136b84e3440a9b2c6cecf35fa1f1,
title = "Impact of cervical cancer screening guidelines on screening for chlamydia",
abstract = "The highest prevalence of chlamydia infection in the United States is among people aged 15 to 24 years. We assessed the impact of not doing routine cervical cancer screening on the rates of chlamydia screening in women aged 15 to 21 years. We classified visits to family medicine ambulatory clinics according to their timing relative to the 2009 guideline change that led to more restrictive cervical cancer screening. Women had higher odds of being screened for chlamydia before vs after the guideline change (odds ratio = 13.97; 95{\%} CI, 9.17-21.29; P <.001). Chlamydia and cervical cancer screening need to be uncoupled and new screening opportunities should be identified.",
author = "Allison Ursu and Ananda Sen and Mack Ruffin",
year = "2015",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1370/afm.1811",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "13",
pages = "361--363",
journal = "Annals of Family Medicine",
issn = "1544-1709",
publisher = "Annals of Family Medicine, Inc",
number = "4",

}

Impact of cervical cancer screening guidelines on screening for chlamydia. / Ursu, Allison; Sen, Ananda; Ruffin, Mack.

In: Annals of family medicine, Vol. 13, No. 4, 01.01.2015, p. 361-363.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Impact of cervical cancer screening guidelines on screening for chlamydia

AU - Ursu, Allison

AU - Sen, Ananda

AU - Ruffin, Mack

PY - 2015/1/1

Y1 - 2015/1/1

N2 - The highest prevalence of chlamydia infection in the United States is among people aged 15 to 24 years. We assessed the impact of not doing routine cervical cancer screening on the rates of chlamydia screening in women aged 15 to 21 years. We classified visits to family medicine ambulatory clinics according to their timing relative to the 2009 guideline change that led to more restrictive cervical cancer screening. Women had higher odds of being screened for chlamydia before vs after the guideline change (odds ratio = 13.97; 95% CI, 9.17-21.29; P <.001). Chlamydia and cervical cancer screening need to be uncoupled and new screening opportunities should be identified.

AB - The highest prevalence of chlamydia infection in the United States is among people aged 15 to 24 years. We assessed the impact of not doing routine cervical cancer screening on the rates of chlamydia screening in women aged 15 to 21 years. We classified visits to family medicine ambulatory clinics according to their timing relative to the 2009 guideline change that led to more restrictive cervical cancer screening. Women had higher odds of being screened for chlamydia before vs after the guideline change (odds ratio = 13.97; 95% CI, 9.17-21.29; P <.001). Chlamydia and cervical cancer screening need to be uncoupled and new screening opportunities should be identified.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84937843681&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84937843681&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1370/afm.1811

DO - 10.1370/afm.1811

M3 - Article

C2 - 26195682

AN - SCOPUS:84937843681

VL - 13

SP - 361

EP - 363

JO - Annals of Family Medicine

JF - Annals of Family Medicine

SN - 1544-1709

IS - 4

ER -