Cargando…
Genital Chlamydia Prevalence in Europe and Non-European High Income Countries: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND: Accurate information about the prevalence of Chlamydia trachomatis is needed to assess national prevention and control measures. METHODS: We systematically reviewed population-based cross-sectional studies that estimated chlamydia prevalence in European Union/European Economic Area (EU/E...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Public Library of Science
2015
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4304822/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25615574 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0115753 |
Sumario: | BACKGROUND: Accurate information about the prevalence of Chlamydia trachomatis is needed to assess national prevention and control measures. METHODS: We systematically reviewed population-based cross-sectional studies that estimated chlamydia prevalence in European Union/European Economic Area (EU/EEA) Member States and non-European high income countries from January 1990 to August 2012. We examined results in forest plots, explored heterogeneity using the I(2) statistic, and conducted random effects meta-analysis if appropriate. Meta-regression was used to examine the relationship between study characteristics and chlamydia prevalence estimates. RESULTS: We included 25 population-based studies from 11 EU/EEA countries and 14 studies from five other high income countries. Four EU/EEA Member States reported on nationally representative surveys of sexually experienced adults aged 18–26 years (response rates 52–71%). In women, chlamydia point prevalence estimates ranged from 3.0–5.3%; the pooled average of these estimates was 3.6% (95% CI 2.4, 4.8, I(2) 0%). In men, estimates ranged from 2.4–7.3% (pooled average 3.5%; 95% CI 1.9, 5.2, I(2) 27%). Estimates in EU/EEA Member States were statistically consistent with those in other high income countries (I(2) 0% for women, 6% for men). There was statistical evidence of an association between survey response rate and estimated chlamydia prevalence; estimates were higher in surveys with lower response rates, (p = 0.003 in women, 0.018 in men). CONCLUSIONS: Population-based surveys that estimate chlamydia prevalence are at risk of participation bias owing to low response rates. Estimates obtained in nationally representative samples of the general population of EU/EEA Member States are similar to estimates from other high income countries. |
---|