You are here

Responses

Article menu
Download PDFPDF
Epidemiology
Original Article
Probability of vertical transmission of Chlamydia trachomatis estimated from national registry data
Compose a Response to This Article
Compose Response

More information about text formats

Plain text

  • No HTML tags allowed.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
Author Information
First or given name, e.g. 'Peter'.
Your last, or family, name, e.g. 'MacMoody'.
Your email address, e.g. higgs-boson@gmail.com
Your role and/or occupation, e.g. 'Orthopedic Surgeon'.
Your organization or institution (if applicable), e.g. 'Royal Free Hospital'.
Statement of Competing Interests

PLEASE NOTE:

  • A rapid response is a moderated but not peer reviewed online response to a published article in a BMJ journal; it will not receive a DOI and will not be indexed unless it is also republished as a Letter, Correspondence or as other content. Find out more about rapid responses.
  • We intend to post all responses which are approved by the Editor, within 14 days (BMJ Journals) or 24 hours (The BMJ), however timeframes cannot be guaranteed. Responses must comply with our requirements and should contribute substantially to the topic, but it is at our absolute discretion whether we publish a response, and we reserve the right to edit or remove responses before and after publication and also republish some or all in other BMJ publications, including third party local editions in other countries and languages
  • Our requirements are stated in our rapid response terms and conditions and must be read. These include ensuring that: i) you do not include any illustrative content including tables and graphs, ii) you do not include any information that includes specifics about any patients,iii) you do not include any original data, unless it has already been published in a peer reviewed journal and you have included a reference, iv) your response is lawful, not defamatory, original and accurate, v) you declare any competing interests, vi) you understand that your name and other personal details set out in our rapid response terms and conditions will be published with any responses we publish and vii) you understand that once a response is published, we may continue to publish your response and/or edit or remove it in the future.
  • By submitting this rapid response you are agreeing to our terms and conditions for rapid responses and understand that your personal data will be processed in accordance with those terms and our privacy notice.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.

Vertical Tabs

Other responses

Jump to comment:

  • Published on: 7 March 2017
    This study did not measure vertical transmission of Chlamydia trachomatis

    The authors estimated vertical transmission of Chlamydia trachomatis by a retrospective analysis using national registry data and clinical records and concluded that transmission was much lower (<2%) than the rate commonly quoted (50-70%). Their suggested explanation is that the modern use of highly sensitive NAATs detects nonviable chlamydiae so that mothers testing positive could actually be noninfectious whereas older studies based on use of culture only identified infectious pregnant women. That is not a likely explanation for such a big difference. When NAAT performance with cervical swabs was evaluated about 2/3 of NAAT positive specimens were culture positive.
    A more likely explanation comes from examining their case definition. It is not chlamydial infection, but rather laboratory confirmed cases of chlamydial conjunctivitis or pneumonia. And that is very different. When prospective studies were being done in San Francisco 175 infants born to chlamydia infected mothers were followed: 31 (18%) developed pneumonia; 29 (17%) conjunctivitis; 64 (37%) were culture positive and 105 (60%) had serologic evidence of infection. Thus there were many more infections than cases of conjunctivitis and pneumonia. But the difference between cases of disease and infection in the Finnish material is probably greater. In the prospective study there were cases of very mild disease that would likely not have been diagnosed in ordinary circumstances (seeing the whole clinical s...

    Show More
    Conflict of Interest:
    None declared.