P047 The three Rs: recalls, reminders and retesting for chlamydia – views of GPs and young adults
Pourquoi ce travail est dans la base
Une base qui oublie comment elle a trouvé un travail ne peut pas être vérifiée. Voici les voies qui ont admis celui-ci.
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
<h3>Background</h3> Chlamydia reinfection increases the risk of pelvic inflammatory disease. Reinfection is common in Australia and while clinical guidelines recommend retesting 3 months post-treatment, less than 25% are retested. We aimed to examine general practitioner (GP) and patient views on retesting for chlamydia and recall/reminder systems to facilitate retesting. <h3>Methods</h3> As part of a trial of chlamydia testing in general practice, GPs were provided with resources and support to implement recall/reminder systems to increase retesting. GPs’ attitudes and practices were examined pre- and mid-intervention using semi-structured interviews. Semi-structured interviews were also conducted with patients throughout the trial. Data were analysed thematically. <h3>Results</h3> 44 GPs undertook a pre-intervention and 24 a mid-intervention interview; 22 patients were interviewed. GPs viewed recalls/reminders as essential to a formal chlamydia control program. There was disparity in whether systems to enable retesting were adopted during the intervention. Barriers to implementing these systems included concerns about costs and time required to ‘chase up’ patients; these barriers persisted during the intervention. Concerns about privacy were raised by most GPs but not patients. Over half of patients were not provided with advice about retesting at the time of their initial chlamydia test. Of the four patients who tested positive, two were retested as per guidelines. Patients were universally supportive of receiving reminders for chlamydia retesting, though retesting when at the clinic for another reason was viewed as ‘more practical’. Patients did not have strong preferences about reminder type (letter, SMS, email). Knowledge gaps were identified by both GPs and patients, and GPs identified a need to improve knowledge of the risks of chlamydia reinfection. <h3>Conclusion</h3> GPs raised more concerns about retesting and reminders than patients. Increasing GP and patient knowledge of the risks of reinfection is crucial. GPs require additional support to implement strategies to increase re-testing. <h3>Disclosure</h3> No significant relationships.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,003 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle