Students and those not currently employed are at increased risk for genital tract infections compared to sexually active women with other occupations; hence women with these occupations should be targeted for sexually transmitted infections screening.

No, there are numerous studies which include occupation as a risk factor for sexually related infections. 

Yes, overall infection rate was comparable to the rate found in another city in Nigeria. The authors also compared the prevalence of the specific strains of bacteria, and noted how they differ from rates found in other counties. 

Eight occupation categories were evaluated, but this reviewer is unable to confirm the appropriateness of the chosen occupations for the locale during the years of the study. A chi-squared test indicted a significant difference among the groups. The authors claim the two groups with the highest rate of infection should be targeted for screening; however, no statistics are presented to indicate these two groups are the ones different from the others. Furthermore, no confounders were taken into account, so it is entirely possible the true underlying trend may be due to factors such as age, education level, income, or other factors. 

A randomized controlled trial design was implemented, and there do not seem to be any significant deviations from the protocol.

The methodology is lacking in correction for confounders, but more importantly, the data was collected from April 2001 to May 2002, published in 2011, and is now being reviewed in 2017. It is likely there will be difficulty reproducing this study as many societal factors may have changed in the time elapsed that would alter the outcome.

This article would have been greatly improved if confounders such as age, education level, or income were considered. This would have a minimal burden on data collection and analysis.

No, due to the aforementioned problems related to the lack of attention to confounders and the time elapsed since data collection.

None. 

My primary criticism of the article regards lack of assessment of confounding factors and more than decade passed since the data was generated. I am not sure what else I should write here.