FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W2017202430> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W2017202430 endingPage "c7250" @default.
• W2017202430 startingPage "c7250" @default.
• W2017202430 abstract "<b>Objectives</b> To compare the cost, cost effectiveness, and sex equity of different intervention strategies within the English National Chlamydia Screening Programme. To develop a tool for calculating cost effectiveness of chlamydia control programmes at a local, national, or international level. <b>Design</b> An economic and mathematical modelling study with cost effectiveness analysis. Costs were restricted to those of screening and partner notification from the perspective of the NHS and excluded patient costs, the costs of reinfection, and costs of complications arising from initial infection. <b>Setting</b> England. <b>Population</b> Individuals eligible for the National Chlamydia Screening Programme. <b>Main outcome measures</b> Cost effectiveness of National Chlamydia Screening Programme in 2008–9 (as cost per individual tested, cost per positive diagnosis, total cost of screening, number screened, number infected, sex ratio of those tested and treated). Comparison of baseline programme with two different interventions—(i) increased coverage of primary screening in men and (ii) increased efficacy of partner notification. <b>Results</b> In 2008–9 screening was estimated to cost about £46.3m in total and £506 per infection treated. Provision for partner notification within the screening programme cost between £9 and £27 per index case, excluding treatment and testing. The model results suggest that increasing male screening coverage from 8% (baseline value) to 24% (to match female coverage) would cost an extra £22.9m and increase the cost per infection treated to £528. In contrast, increasing partner notification efficacy from 0.4 (baseline value) to 0.8 partners per index case would cost an extra £3.3m and would reduce the cost per infection diagnosed to £449. Increasing screening coverage to 24% in men would cost over six times as much as increasing partner notification to 0.8 but only treat twice as many additional infections. <b>Conclusions</b> In the English National Chlamydia Screening Programme increasing the effectiveness of partner notification is likely to cost less than increasing male coverage but also improve the ratio of women to men diagnosed. Further evaluation of the cost effectiveness of partner notification and screening is urgently needed. The spreadsheet tool developed in this study can be easily modified for use in other settings to evaluate chlamydia control programmes." @default.
• W2017202430 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W2017202430 creator A5008868406 @default.
• W2017202430 creator A5010951901 @default.
• W2017202430 creator A5018985594 @default.
• W2017202430 creator A5042748852 @default.
• W2017202430 creator A5044664869 @default.
• W2017202430 creator A5073563407 @default.
• W2017202430 creator A5091494335 @default.
• W2017202430 date "2011-01-04" @default.
• W2017202430 modified "2023-10-17" @default.
• W2017202430 title "Costs and cost effectiveness of different strategies for chlamydia screening and partner notification: an economic and mathematical modelling study" @default.
• W2017202430 cites W1892344333 @default.
• W2017202430 cites W1966615724 @default.
• W2017202430 cites W1970999003 @default.
• W2017202430 cites W2001961817 @default.
• W2017202430 cites W2031866988 @default.
• W2017202430 cites W2049891624 @default.
• W2017202430 cites W2095142010 @default.
• W2017202430 cites W2098327330 @default.
• W2017202430 cites W2115093110 @default.
• W2017202430 cites W2115165032 @default.
• W2017202430 cites W2142051701 @default.
• W2017202430 cites W2143118208 @default.
• W2017202430 cites W2146411244 @default.
• W2017202430 cites W2159640352 @default.
• W2017202430 cites W2167704008 @default.
• W2017202430 cites W2592215858 @default.
• W2017202430 doi "https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.c7250" @default.
• W2017202430 hasPubMedId "https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/21205807" @default.
• W2017202430 hasPublicationYear "2011" @default.
• W2017202430 type Work @default.
• W2017202430 sameAs 2017202430 @default.
• W2017202430 citedByCount "46" @default.
• W2017202430 countsByYear W20172024302012 @default.
• W2017202430 countsByYear W20172024302013 @default.
• W2017202430 countsByYear W20172024302014 @default.
• W2017202430 countsByYear W20172024302015 @default.
• W2017202430 countsByYear W20172024302016 @default.
• W2017202430 countsByYear W20172024302017 @default.
• W2017202430 countsByYear W20172024302019 @default.
• W2017202430 countsByYear W20172024302020 @default.
• W2017202430 countsByYear W20172024302021 @default.
• W2017202430 countsByYear W20172024302022 @default.
• W2017202430 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W2017202430 hasAuthorship W2017202430A5008868406 @default.
• W2017202430 hasAuthorship W2017202430A5010951901 @default.
• W2017202430 hasAuthorship W2017202430A5018985594 @default.
• W2017202430 hasAuthorship W2017202430A5042748852 @default.
• W2017202430 hasAuthorship W2017202430A5044664869 @default.
• W2017202430 hasAuthorship W2017202430A5073563407 @default.
• W2017202430 hasAuthorship W2017202430A5091494335 @default.
• W2017202430 hasBestOaLocation W20172024301 @default.
• W2017202430 hasConcept C112930515 @default.
• W2017202430 hasConcept C121955636 @default.
• W2017202430 hasConcept C12725497 @default.
• W2017202430 hasConcept C127454912 @default.
• W2017202430 hasConcept C144133560 @default.
• W2017202430 hasConcept C159110408 @default.
• W2017202430 hasConcept C182299520 @default.
• W2017202430 hasConcept C18903297 @default.
• W2017202430 hasConcept C203014093 @default.
• W2017202430 hasConcept C27415008 @default.
• W2017202430 hasConcept C2776983459 @default.
• W2017202430 hasConcept C2777595491 @default.
• W2017202430 hasConcept C2780122209 @default.
• W2017202430 hasConcept C2908647359 @default.
• W2017202430 hasConcept C3013748606 @default.
• W2017202430 hasConcept C3019080777 @default.
• W2017202430 hasConcept C505870484 @default.
• W2017202430 hasConcept C512399662 @default.
• W2017202430 hasConcept C515549039 @default.
• W2017202430 hasConcept C71924100 @default.
• W2017202430 hasConcept C86803240 @default.
• W2017202430 hasConcept C99454951 @default.
• W2017202430 hasConceptScore W2017202430C112930515 @default.
• W2017202430 hasConceptScore W2017202430C121955636 @default.
• W2017202430 hasConceptScore W2017202430C12725497 @default.
• W2017202430 hasConceptScore W2017202430C127454912 @default.
• W2017202430 hasConceptScore W2017202430C144133560 @default.
• W2017202430 hasConceptScore W2017202430C159110408 @default.
• W2017202430 hasConceptScore W2017202430C182299520 @default.
• W2017202430 hasConceptScore W2017202430C18903297 @default.
• W2017202430 hasConceptScore W2017202430C203014093 @default.
• W2017202430 hasConceptScore W2017202430C27415008 @default.
• W2017202430 hasConceptScore W2017202430C2776983459 @default.
• W2017202430 hasConceptScore W2017202430C2777595491 @default.
• W2017202430 hasConceptScore W2017202430C2780122209 @default.
• W2017202430 hasConceptScore W2017202430C2908647359 @default.
• W2017202430 hasConceptScore W2017202430C3013748606 @default.
• W2017202430 hasConceptScore W2017202430C3019080777 @default.
• W2017202430 hasConceptScore W2017202430C505870484 @default.
• W2017202430 hasConceptScore W2017202430C512399662 @default.
• W2017202430 hasConceptScore W2017202430C515549039 @default.
• W2017202430 hasConceptScore W2017202430C71924100 @default.
• W2017202430 hasConceptScore W2017202430C86803240 @default.
• W2017202430 hasConceptScore W2017202430C99454951 @default.
• W2017202430 hasIssue "jan04 1" @default.

• next