Table 1.

Major parameters used in the cost-effectiveness analyses

Parameters	Value	Range	Reference
Probability of background testing
Male, among those tested positive	.50	.20–.50	Authors’ assumption that only male students with symptomatic infections would get tested, 50% probability of symptomatic infection [22]
Female, among those who were sexually active	.44	.22–.66	Center for Disease Control and Prevention Medicaid study of 2012 Michigan Medicaid data (personal communication)
Female, among those tested positive	.55	.276–.728	Authors’ calculation based on 20% probability of symptomatic infection [22], all symptomatically infected females would get tested, 44% of asymptomatically infected females would get tested
Test sensitivity	.95	.9–1	[17]
Treatment efficacy (azithromycin)	.92	.8–1	[17]
Probability of reinfection
Male	.11	.065–.178	[19]
Female	.18	.09—.27	[18]
Probability of natural clearance
Male	.20	.10–.30	[20]
Female	.20	.10–.30	[20]
Probability of developing epididymitis or PID
Epididymitis	.02	.01–.05	[22]
PID	.16	.12–.30	.16 (ranging from .12 to .17; [25]), .30 ([24]; [7]), and .15 ([17,22])
Transmission probability per partnership
Male to female	.70	.25–.80	[21]
Female to male	.68	.25–.80	[21]
Clinical screening/testing and treatment costs
Screening/testing ($)	57.50	28.7–86.2	[17]
Treatment ($)	29.80	14.9–44.7	[24]
Treatment costs of sequelae
Epididymitis ($)	1,347	673–2,020	[17]
PID ($)	3,513	1,756–5,269	[26]
QALYs lost/case
Epididymitis	.01	.0048–.01	[27]
PID	.34	.177–.53	[27]

PID = pelvic inflammatory disease; QALY = quality-adjusted life-years.