{"status":"ok","message-type":"work","message-version":"1.0.0","message":{"indexed":{"date-parts":[[2026,7,1]],"date-time":"2026-07-01T02:24:59Z","timestamp":1782872699057,"version":"3.54.5"},"reference-count":10,"publisher":"BMJ","issue":"5","content-domain":{"domain":["bmj.com"],"crossmark-restriction":true},"short-container-title":["Sex Transm Infect"],"accepted":{"date-parts":[[2013,4,6]]},"published-print":{"date-parts":[[2013,8]]},"abstract":"<jats:sec><jats:title>Objective<\/jats:title><jats:p>Chlamydia re-infection data are used to inform and evaluate chlamydia control programmes. We quantitatively investigated the effect of denominator selection on estimating re-infection rates and trends.<\/jats:p><\/jats:sec><jats:sec><jats:title>Methods<\/jats:title><jats:p>Using data on women aged 15\u201344\u2005years enrolled in Group Health Cooperative (GH), a Pacific Northwest health plan, annual chlamydia re-infection rates from 1998 to 2006 were calculated. Three different denominators were compared using person-years contributed by: (1) all women; (2) women with a prior documented chlamydial infection regardless of whether they were retested; and (3) women with a prior chlamydial infection who were retested within 14\u2005months.<\/jats:p><\/jats:sec><jats:sec><jats:title>Results<\/jats:title><jats:p>From 1998 to 2006, among all women 15\u201344\u2005years enrolled in GH, re-infection rates increased from 64 to 149 cases per 100\u2005000 person-years. Among women with a prior infection, rates decreased from 10\u2005857 to 8782 cases per 100\u2005000 person-years. Among women with a prior infection who were retested, rates increased from 29\u2005374 to 42\u2005475 cases per 100\u2005000 person-years.<\/jats:p><\/jats:sec><jats:sec><jats:title>Conclusions<\/jats:title><jats:p>Using the same dataset, we demonstrate that it is possible to tell three different stories about the magnitude of rates and trends in chlamydia re-infection among women by using different denominators. All of these strategies have limitations, but restricting the denominator to women with a prior infection who are retested may best represent the population at-risk for re-infection. Still, rates do not account for additional factors influencing the number of re-infections diagnosed, including screening coverage and changes in test technology. Caution is needed in examining and comparing re-infection data.<\/jats:p><\/jats:sec>","DOI":"10.1136\/sextrans-2012-050970","type":"journal-article","created":{"date-parts":[[2013,5,5]],"date-time":"2013-05-05T00:21:41Z","timestamp":1367713301000},"page":"388-390","update-policy":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1136\/crossmarkpolicy","source":"Crossref","is-referenced-by-count":4,"title":["Estimating chlamydia re-infection rates: an empirical example"],"prefix":"10.1136","volume":"89","author":[{"given":"Elizabeth A","family":"Torrone","sequence":"first","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Catherine L","family":"Satterwhite","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Delia","family":"Scholes","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Onchee","family":"Yu","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Stuart","family":"Berman","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Thomas A","family":"Peterman","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]}],"member":"239","published-online":{"date-parts":[[2013,5,4]]},"reference":[{"key":"2024051410055368000_89.5.388.1","first-page":"145","volume":"89","author":"Liu","year":"2013","journal-title":"Sex Transm Infect"},{"key":"2024051410055368000_89.5.388.2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1097\/OLQ.0b013e3181a2a933"},{"key":"2024051410055368000_89.5.388.3","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.7326\/0003-4819-145-8-200610170-00005"},{"key":"2024051410055368000_89.5.388.4","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1136\/sextrans-2012-050967"},{"key":"2024051410055368000_89.5.388.5","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1136\/sti.2006.024059"},{"key":"2024051410055368000_89.5.388.6","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1136\/sti.2007.028662"},{"key":"2024051410055368000_89.5.388.7","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1086\/497341"},{"key":"2024051410055368000_89.5.388.8","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1097\/OLQ.0b013e31823e3009"},{"issue":"RR-12","key":"2024051410055368000_89.5.388.9","first-page":"1","article-title":"Sexually transmitted diseases treatment guidelines, 2010","volume":"59","author":"Workowski","year":"2010","journal-title":"MMWR Recomm Rep"},{"key":"2024051410055368000_89.5.388.10","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1086\/648734"}],"container-title":["Sexually Transmitted Infections"],"original-title":[],"language":"en","link":[{"URL":"https:\/\/syndication.highwire.org\/content\/doi\/10.1136\/sextrans-2012-050970","content-type":"unspecified","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"similarity-checking"}],"deposited":{"date-parts":[[2024,5,14]],"date-time":"2024-05-14T17:06:41Z","timestamp":1715706401000},"score":1,"resource":{"primary":{"URL":"https:\/\/sti.bmj.com\/lookup\/doi\/10.1136\/sextrans-2012-050970"}},"subtitle":[],"short-title":[],"issued":{"date-parts":[[2013,5,4]]},"references-count":10,"journal-issue":{"issue":"5","published-online":{"date-parts":[[2013,7,15]]},"published-print":{"date-parts":[[2013,8]]}},"alternative-id":["10.1136\/sextrans-2012-050970"],"URL":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1136\/sextrans-2012-050970","relation":{},"ISSN":["1368-4973","1472-3263"],"issn-type":[{"value":"1368-4973","type":"print"},{"value":"1472-3263","type":"electronic"}],"subject":[],"published":{"date-parts":[[2013,5,4]]}}}