The effect of antibiotic treatment on active trachoma and ocular Chlamydia trachomatis infection

Mabey, David; Solomon, Anthony W.

doi:10.1586/14787210.1.2.209

Cited by 8 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 49 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Among the 18 co-publications with at least one included study, 13 (72 %) cited all studies included in the CEVG review, three (17 %) cited some of the included studies [14, 26, 32], and two (11 %) did not cite any of the included studies [16, 40]. …”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…of citations Web of ScienceNo. of citations, ScopusBarsam 2012 [20]311Barsam 2010 [19]2374Buehl 2008 [22]402222Findl 2007 [21]1004337Calderon 2011 [11]322021Calderon 2011 [7]1971Calderon 2012 [12]N/A a N/A a 0Evans 2008 [4]823749Evans 2006 [5]1114514Evans 2008 [6]283335Fedorowicz 2006 [24]1286Fedorowicz 2005 [23]4710Gnanaraj 2005 [34]1239Richardson 2003 [33]32412Leyland 2003 [28]183109130Leyland 2001 [27]872618Lueck 2002 [30]11N/A a 8Lueck 2002 [29]77010Mabey 2003 [32]N/A a N/A a 5Mabey 2002 [31]6969Sheikh 2001 [13]814352Sheikh 2000 [8]1583321Sheikh 2005 [14]542530Shortt 2006 [36]693950Shortt 2006 [35]…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Cochrane systematic reviews and co-publication: dissemination of evidence on interventions for ophthalmic conditions

2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundSystematic reviews of interventions provide a summary of the evidence available on intervention effectiveness and harm. Cochrane systematic reviews (CSRs) have been published electronically in the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (CDSR) since 1994, and co-publication (publication of a Cochrane review in another journal) has been allowed since that time, as long as the co-publishing journal has agreed to the arrangement. Although standards for co-publication were established in 2008, the frequency of co-publication and adherence to the standards have remained largely unexamined. Our objective was to examine the frequency of co-publication of Cochrane Eyes and Vision Group (CEVG) reviews, adherence to the co-publication policy, the relative numbers of citations of the two modes of publishing, and differences in times cited in CSRs with and without a co-publication.MethodsWe identified all CEVG reviews published by May 30, 2014 in The Cochrane Library. Using keywords from the title, author names, and “Cochrane Eyes and Vision Group”, we searched Google Scholar, Web of Science, Scopus, and PubMed databases to identify possible co-publications. We also emailed contact authors of all identified CEVG reviews to ask them whether they had published their CSR elsewhere. We compared each co-publication to the corresponding CEVG review for adherence to the Cochrane Policy Manual (dated June 10, 2014). We recorded the number of times each CEVG review and each co-publication had been cited by others according to Google Scholar, Web of Science, and Scopus, as of June 11, 2014.ResultsWe identified 117 CEVG reviews;19 had been co-published in 22 articles. Adherence to Cochrane policy on co-publication was moderate, with all authors complying with at least one of four requirements we addressed. Co-publications were cited more often than the corresponding CEVG reviews; CEVG reviews with at least one co-publication were cited approximately twice as often as CEVG reviews without a co-publication. The number of citations varied considerably depending on whether the CEVG review had a co-publication or not.ConclusionsThe findings support encouraging co-publication while maintaining the primacy of the Cochrane systematic review. Support for co-publication may be tempered by other factors such as the possibility that CEVG reviews with a co-publication covered more clinically important and timely topics than those without a co-publication. Assuming that citations are a valid measure of dissemination effectiveness, the 15-year CEVG experience with co-publication of systematic reviews suggests that Cochrane authors should be encouraged to co-publish in traditional medical journals.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13643-015-0104-5) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cochrane systematic reviews and co-publication: dissemination of evidence on interventions for ophthalmic conditions

2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In general, the evidence supporting the efficacy of tetracycline is weak. 29 Many people who receive a prescription for a six-week course probably fail to complete it. 25,30 In the present study, as in control programs, compliance with tetracycline treatment was not monitored.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Mass Treatment with Single-Dose Azithromycin for Trachoma

et al. 2004

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Trachoma, caused by repeated ocular infection with Chlamydia trachomatis, is an important cause of blindness. Current recommended dosing intervals for mass azithromycin treatment for trachoma are based on a mathematical model. Methods We collected conjunctival swabs for quantitative polymerase-chain-reaction assay of C. trachomatis before and 2, 6, 12, 18, and 24 months after mass treatment with azithromycin in a Tanzanian community in which trachoma was endemic. For ethical reasons, at 6, 12, and 18 months, we gave tetracycline eye ointment to residents who had clinically active trachoma. Results At baseline, 956 of 978 residents (97.8 percent) received either one oral dose of azithromycin or (if azithromycin was contraindicated) a course of tetracycline eye ointment. The prevalence of infection fell from 9.5 percent before mass treatment to 2.1 percent at 2 months and 0.1 percent at 24 months. The quantitative burden of ocular C. trachomatis infection in the community was 13.9 percent of the pretreatment level at 2 months and 0.8 percent at 24 months. At each time point after baseline, over 90 percent of the total community burden of C. trachomatis infection was found among subjects who had been positive the previous time they were tested. Conclusions The prevalence and intensity of infection fell dramatically and remained low for two years after treatment. One round of very-high-coverage mass treatment with azithromycin, perhaps aided by subsequent periodic use of tetracycline eye ointment for persons with active disease, can interrupt the transmission of ocular C. trachomatis infection.

show abstract

“…Serovars A and B, certain serovar Ba strains, and serovar C are commonly associated with the ocular disease trachoma (17). While serovars B and C are rarely found in the urogenital tract (19), serovars Ba (specifically, the genovariant A7), D/Da, E, H, I/Ia, J, K, F, and G/Ga are common in the urogenital tract and can sometimes be detected in the respiratory tracts of infants because of transmission during delivery (4).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluation of a Novel PCR-Based Assay for Detection and Identification of Chlamydia trachomatis Serovars in Cervical Specimens

et al. 2007

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aims of this study were to compare a novel PCR-based Chlamydia trachomatis detection and genotyping (Ct-DT) assay with the FDA-approved, commercially available C. trachomatis detection Hybrid Capture 2 (HC2) assay and to investigate the C. trachomatis serovar distribution among young women in a rural Costa Rican study population. A total of 5,828 sexually active women participating in a community-based trial in Costa Rica were tested for C. trachomatis by HC2. A sample of 1,229 specimens consisting of 100% HC2 C. trachomatis-positive specimens (n ‫؍‬ 827) and a random sample of 8% HC2 C. trachomatis-negative specimens (n ‫؍‬ 402) were tested with the Ct-DT assay. Agreement between the two assays was determined by the unweighted kappa statistic. Discrepant specimens were tested with a second commercially available test (COBAS TaqMan

show abstract

The effect of antibiotic treatment on active trachoma and ocular Chlamydia trachomatis infection

Cited by 8 publications

References 49 publications

Cochrane systematic reviews and co-publication: dissemination of evidence on interventions for ophthalmic conditions

Cochrane systematic reviews and co-publication: dissemination of evidence on interventions for ophthalmic conditions

Mass Treatment with Single-Dose Azithromycin for Trachoma

Evaluation of a Novel PCR-Based Assay for Detection and Identification of Chlamydia trachomatis Serovars in Cervical Specimens

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About