Objectives: Chlamydia trachomatis (Chlamydia) is the most prevalent sexually transmitted bacterial infection and can cause considerable reproductive morbidity in women. Chlamydia screening programmes have been considered but policy recommendations are hampered by the lack of population based data. This paper describes the prevalence of Chlamydia in 15-29 year old women and men in rural and urban areas, as determined through systematic population based screening organised by the Municipal Public Health Services (MHS), and discusses the implications of this screening strategy for routine implementation. Methods: Stratified national probability survey according to ''area address density'' (AAD). 21 000 randomly selected women and men in four regions, aged 15-29 years received a home sampling kit. Urine samples were returned by mail and tested by polymerase chain reaction (PCR). Treatment was via the general practitioner, STI clinic, or MHS clinic. Results: 41% (8383) responded by sending in urine and questionnaire. 11% (2227) returned a refusal card. Non-responders included both higher and lower risk categories. Chlamydia prevalence was significantly lower in rural areas (0.6%, 95% CI 0.1 to 1.1) compared with very highly urbanised areas (3.2%, 95% CI 2.4 to 4.0). Overall prevalence was 2.0% (95% CI 1.7 to 2.3): 2.5% (95% CI 2.0 to 3.0%) in women and 1.5% (95% CI 1.1 to 1.8) in men. Of all cases 91% were treated. Infection was associated with degree of urbanisation, ethnicity, number of sex partners, and symptoms. Conclusion: This large, population based study found very low prevalence in rural populations, suggesting that nationwide systematic screening is not indicated in the Netherlands and that targeted approaches are a better option. Further analysis of risk profiles will contribute to determine how selective screening can be done.

This paper aims at achieving a better understanding of rental housing market discrimination against ethnic minorities. There remain substantial lacunae in the scientific knowledge about the association between the concentration of ethnic minorities in the neighbourhood and discrimination, and possible differences in discrimination based on host society language proficiency. Although these associations have been considered in the U.S., they have been neglected in the European context, which is quite different. A telephone survey offered data on 579 properties that is linked to (1) whether the fictitious ethnic minority candidate masters the host society language or not, (2) the rent of the offered unit, (3) the percentage of minorities in the neighbourhood and (4) the socioeconomic background of the neighbourhood.Using multilevel modelling, we found (1) that host society language proficient migrants are discriminated against as often as non-proficient migrants and found (2) a curvilinear association between rent and discrimination, with more discrimination for both cheaper and more expensive rental offers. We found (3) no association between the presence of minorities in the neighbourhood and the occurrence of discrimination, contrary to previous research in the U.S., and found (4) no association between discrimination and the socioeconomic background of a neighbourhood.

While the construction of high-rise buildings is a popular policy strategy for accommodating population growth in cities, there is still much debate about the health consequences of living in high flats. This study examines the relationship between living in high-rise buildings and self-rated health in Belgium. We use data from the Belgian Census of 2001, merged with the National Register of Belgium (N = 6,102,820). Results from multilevel, binary logistic regression analyses show that residents living in high-rise buildings have considerable lower odds to have a good or very good self-rated health in comparison with residents in low-rise buildings (OR 0.67; 95 % CI 0.67-0.68). However, this negative relationship disappears completely after adjusting for socioeconomic and demographic variables (OR 1.04; 95 % CI 1.03-1.05), which suggests that residents' worse self-rated health in high-rise buildings can be explained by the strong demographic and socioeconomic segregation between high- and low-rise buildings in Belgium. In addition, there is a weak, but robust curvilinear relationship between floor level and self-rated health within high-rise buildings. Self-rated health increases until the sixth floor (OR 1.19; 95 % CI 1.15-1.24) and remains stable from the seventh floor and upwards. These findings refute one of the central ideas in architectural sciences that living in high buildings is bad for one's health.

The ethnic residential segregation literature seldom considers household characteristics, despite their importance for residential mobility. This study offers a first step to amend this lacuna by focussing on the relationship between marital status and the presence of children on the one hand and the extent to which ethnic majority households live segregated on the other. We investigated this association with data from the 2011 Belgian Census. We performed a conditional logit model on a sample of households formed by young adults of Belgian origin living in the metropolitan areas of Antwerp (N = 11,241), Brussels (N = 6690), Charleroi (N = 3483), Ghent (N = 7825) and Liège (N = 5873). It appeared that households with children are less likely than childless households to live in diverse neighbourhoods. Considering partnership status, we find that singles are the most likely to live in diverse neighbourhoods. Amongst the couples without children, those couples in legal cohabitation are less likely to live in diverse neighbourhoods than married or other unmarried couples, while married couples with children are less likely to do so when comparing to unmarried couples with children, both legally cohabiting and others. We, therefore, conclude that it is important to consider (the interaction between) partnership status and the presence of children when studying ethnic residential segregation.

Previous research on gentrification almost exclusively focussed on either the gentrifiers or those who are displaced. Those who manage to avoid displacement remain understudied. To shed new light on these original inhabitants, we link upward change in low-income neighbourhoods, measured by the changing socio-economic composition of the neighbourhood, to the propensity to move based on dissatisfaction with the neighbourhood or the home of both lower- or middle-educated people and higher-educated people living in these neighbourhoods. We perform binary logistic multi-level analyses on the Liveability Monitor of Ghent (N = 1037), a midsized city in Belgium. We find that upward neighbourhood change is associated with a higher propensity to move based on dissatisfaction with the home for both the lower- and higher-educated original inhabitants. Focusing on dissatisfaction with the neighbourhood, we find no association between moving propensities and the neighbourhood someone lives in. We therefore conclude that it is not the evaluation of the neighbourhood but the evaluation of one's own house in an improving neighbourhood that is associated with higher moving propensities, for both higher and lower educated respondents. Displacement pressures based on rising housing prices might lead to these moving propensities, but it seems likely that there are other factors at play too, like, e.g. life cycle mobility. We therefore also conclude that both lower- and higher-educated inhabitants of improving neighbourhoods deserve academic attention