Article Text

Download PDFPDF
The correct approach to modelling and evaluating chlamydia screening
  1. T Roberts,
  2. S Robinson,
  3. P Barton,
  4. S Bryan,
  5. A McCarthy,
  6. J Macleod,
  7. M Egger,
  8. N Low
  1. Health Economics Facility, HSMC, University of Birmingham, Park House, 40 Edgbaston Park Road, Birmingham B15 2RT, UK
  1. Correspondence to:
 T Roberts
 Health Economics Facility, HSMC, University of Birmingham, Park House, 40 Edgbaston Park Road, Birmingham B15 2RT, UK; t.e.robertsbham.ac.uk

Statistics from Altmetric.com

Request Permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

A recent systematic review of economic evaluations suggests that screening for genital chlamydia infection is “cost effective.”1 We are concerned about how the authors reached this conclusion since the reviewers did not take into account the fact that Chlamydia trachomatis is infectious. The methodological problems arising from this fundamental flaw raise questions about the validity of the conclusion.

The correct model to use in the evaluation of an infectious disease must be capable of encompassing all its effects, including the potential for transmission. Bernoulli first reported such transmission dynamic models in the 18th century.2 The wide misuse of static, as opposed to transmission dynamic, models has been noted …

View Full Text

Footnotes

  • Conflict of interest: The authors are all members of the Chlamydia trachomatis Screening Studies (ClaSS) Working Group. Part of the remit of this group is to conduct a systematic review of economic studies of Chlamydia trachomatis screening and to construct a model with which to evaluate the cost effectiveness of chlamydia screening.