Sexually transmitted diseases · 2020
Exploring How Epidemic Context Influences Syphilis Screening Impact: A Mathematical Modeling Study.
СтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАПоддержка службы здравоохранения СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Tuite Ashleigh R, Testa Christian, Rönn Minttu, Bellerose Meghan, Gift Thomas, Fridge Jessica, Molotnikov Lauren, Desmarais Catherine, Berruti Andrés, Menzies Nicolas, Malyuta Yelena, Hsu Katherine, Salomon Joshua A
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: The current syphilis epidemic in the United States is concentrated in gay, bisexual, and other men who have sex with men (MSM), but substantial heterosexual transmission is reported in some parts of the country. Using the US states of Louisiana and Massachusetts as case studies, we investigated how epidemic context influences the impact of population screening approaches for syphilis control.
METHODS: We constructed a compartmental metapopulation model parameterized to describe observed patterns of syphilis transmission. We estimated the impact of different approaches to screening, including perfect adherence to current US screening guidelines in MSM.
RESULTS: In Louisiana, where syphilis cases are more evenly distributed among MSM and heterosexual populations, we projected that screening according to guidelines would contribute to no change or an increase in syphilis burden, compared with burden with current estimated screening coverage. In Massachusetts, which has a more MSM-focused outbreak, we projected that screening according to guidelines would be as or more effective than current screening coverage in most population groups.
CONCLUSIONS: Men who have sex with men-focused approaches to screening may be insufficient for control when there is substantial transmission in heterosexual populations. Epidemic characteristics may be useful when identifying at-risk groups for syphilis screening.
METHODS: We constructed a compartmental metapopulation model parameterized to describe observed patterns of syphilis transmission. We estimated the impact of different approaches to screening, including perfect adherence to current US screening guidelines in MSM.
RESULTS: In Louisiana, where syphilis cases are more evenly distributed among MSM and heterosexual populations, we projected that screening according to guidelines would contribute to no change or an increase in syphilis burden, compared with burden with current estimated screening coverage. In Massachusetts, which has a more MSM-focused outbreak, we projected that screening according to guidelines would be as or more effective than current screening coverage in most population groups.
CONCLUSIONS: Men who have sex with men-focused approaches to screening may be insufficient for control when there is substantial transmission in heterosexual populations. Epidemic characteristics may be useful when identifying at-risk groups for syphilis screening.