Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
To estimate the prevalence of urogenital chlamydial infection among young, low-income women in northern California and to describe correlates of infection, a population-based door-to-door household cluster survey was conducted from 1996 through 1998. The participants included 1439 women 18-29 years of age, with a mean age of 24 years, most of whom were African American (43%) or Latina (23%) and had a median income of $500-$999 per month. Most (94%) had received health care in the past year, and approximately 50% was covered by state insurance programs. Although more than half (62%) had had a recent pelvic examination, only 42% had recently used a condom with a new partner. The prevalence of urogenital chlamydial infection was 3.2% (95% confidence interval, 2.2%-4.2%). Women with chlamydia were more likely to be younger (18-21 years of age) and nonwhite and to have lower socioeconomic status. These data demonstrated an approximately 2-3-fold greater burden of infection than routine surveillance data have suggested.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Klausner et al. (2001) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: