3. Summary of included studies and outcomes reported by authors, according to partner notification strategies and comparisons.

Partner notification strategy Comparison number, comparison	N (studies)	n (participants)	Outcomes, as reported in any included RCT	Study ID
ENHANCED PATIENT REFERRAL
1. Enhanced patient referral vs. simple patient referral	16	7642	Index patient returning for a test of cure Knowledge of the index patient Number of partners notified and referral of partners for treatment Proportion of index patients with at least 1 partner tested Proportion of index cases with at least 1 sexual partner treated Proportion of index patients with at least 1 partner positive for C. trachomatis Number of partners treated per index patient 6 weeks after randomisation Number of partners elicited Proportion of index cases with a positive chlamydia test result 6 weeks after randomisation Proportion of index cases with all sexual partners treated Acceptability of Internet for use in standard partner notification Partners located Index re‐infection Harms ‐ adverse effects of medication Index patient 72‐hour follow‐up Medication adherence Temporary abstinence from sexual intercourse as evidence of self care Behavioural change Partners contacted Partners tested Partners testing positive Time until testing of partners Number of partners treated per index case Number of partners identified per index Number of traceable partners Number of partners treated within 28 days Proportion of index patients with at least 1 partner treated within 28 days per index case	Andersen 1998 Apoola 2009 Cleveland undated Cameron 2009 Ellison undated Kerani 2011 Katz 1988 Kissinger 2005 Kissinger 2006 Low 2005 Moyo 2002 Ostergaard 2003 Solomon 1988 Tomnay 2006 Trent 2010 Wilson 2009
2. Enhanced patient referral vs. other enhanced patient referral method	2	1336	Partners presenting for care Partners elicited Partners treated	Montesinos 1990 Ellison undated
EXPEDITED PARTNER THERAPY
3. EPT vs. simple patient referral	8	6537	Re‐infection rate of index patient Number of partners notified Partner treatment Sexual outcomes such as having unprotected sex before partner took medication, re‐initiated sex with partner, unprotected sex with any partner Partners elicited Index patient 2‐week post‐treatment return Harms ‐ fighting and refusal of intercourse Side effects of drugs Partner testing	Cameron 2009 Golden 2005 Kerani 2011 Kissinger 2005 Kissinger 2006 Nuwaha 2001 Schillinger 2002 Schwebke 2010
4.1 EPT vs. enhanced patient referral	4	1253	Re‐infection rate of index patient Number of partners notified Partner testing Partner treatment Sexual outcome (unprotected sex, re‐initiated sex with untreated partner)	Cameron 2009 Kerani 2011 Kissinger 2005 Kissinger 2006
4.2 EPT and enhanced patient referral vs. simple patient referral	1	41	Number of partners notified Number of partners treated Method (telephone or in person) of partner notification used Partner tested for HIV/syphilis Adverse events	Kerani 2011
CONTRACT REFERRAL
5 Contract referral vs. simple patient referral	5	2006	Number of partners notified Partners presenting to health service Partners testing positive	Brown 2011 Cleveland undated Landis 1992 Potterat 1977 Schwebke 2010
6. Contract referral vs. enhanced patient referral	1	1266	Partners presenting for care Partners testing positive	Cleveland undated
7. Contract referral vs. EPT	1	324	Re‐infection index patient	Schwebke 2010
8. PROVIDER REFERRAL
8.1 Provider referral vs. simple patient referral	2	596	Partners located Partners treated Partner visit to the clinic during the 30 days after index enrolment Harms Partners testing positive	Brown 2011 Katz 1988
8.2 Choice between provider or simple patient referral vs. simple patient referral	1	396	Partners elicited Number of partners notified Partners treated Harms	Faxelid 1996
9. Provider referral vs. enhanced patient referral	1	461	Partners elicited Partners testing positive Partners treated	Katz 1988
10. Provider referral vs. contract referral	2	2206	Partners tested Partners treated Partner presenting for care Harms Partners testing positive	Brown 2011 Peterman 1997

The outcomes listed are those reported by the authors of the RCTs. Not all were named primary or secondary outcomes in the review.

EPT: expedited partner therapy; HIV: human immunodeficiency virus; RCT: randomised controlled trial.