TY - JOUR
T1 - Partner notification for sexually transmitted diseases
T2 - An overview of the evidence
AU - Oxman, A. D.
AU - Scott, E. A.F.
AU - Sellors, J. W.
AU - Clarke, J. H.
AU - Millson, M. E.
AU - Rasooly, I.
AU - Frank, J. W.
AU - Naus, M.
AU - Goldblatt, E.
N1 - Copyright:
Copyright 2004 Elsevier B.V., All rights reserved.
PY - 1994
Y1 - 1994
N2 - Objective: To compare the effectiveness of alternative partner notification strategies for gonorrhea, chlamydia, syphilis, HIV and hepatitis B. Data sources: Studies were identified using MEDLINE, EMBASE, SCISEARCH and other databases, review of reference lists and personal contact with over 80 international experts. Study selection: Studies with at least two comparison groups exposed to different partner notification strategies were included. Data extraction: Methodological rigor was assessed, and information regarding study populations, interventions and outcomes was extracted independently by two reviewers. Main results: Twelve studies met our inclusion criteria; five were methodologically strong; seven provided data on the referral process; four provided data on trained interviewers compared with routine care providers; and three provided data on the interview process. Conclusions: Only limited, broad conclusions regarding the effectiveness of various partner notification approaches could be drawn from these comparative studies. Until newer data become available, practice guidelines must be based to a large extent on other grounds.
AB - Objective: To compare the effectiveness of alternative partner notification strategies for gonorrhea, chlamydia, syphilis, HIV and hepatitis B. Data sources: Studies were identified using MEDLINE, EMBASE, SCISEARCH and other databases, review of reference lists and personal contact with over 80 international experts. Study selection: Studies with at least two comparison groups exposed to different partner notification strategies were included. Data extraction: Methodological rigor was assessed, and information regarding study populations, interventions and outcomes was extracted independently by two reviewers. Main results: Twelve studies met our inclusion criteria; five were methodologically strong; seven provided data on the referral process; four provided data on trained interviewers compared with routine care providers; and three provided data on the interview process. Conclusions: Only limited, broad conclusions regarding the effectiveness of various partner notification approaches could be drawn from these comparative studies. Until newer data become available, practice guidelines must be based to a large extent on other grounds.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0027993548&partnerID=8YFLogxK
M3 - Article
C2 - 7987758
AN - SCOPUS:0027993548
SN - 0008-4263
VL - 85
SP - S41-S47
JO - Canadian Journal of Public Health
JF - Canadian Journal of Public Health
IS - SUPPL. 1
ER -