Verwijs MC, et al. - Researchers conducted this cross-sectional screening and diagnostic accuracy study comparing the performance of the women's improvement of sexual and reproductive health (WISH) study algorithms (include point-of-care tests) and the WHO vaginal discharge and lower abdominal pain algorithms with gold standard testing among women aged 18 years or older with or without urogenital symptoms at risk of acquiring sexually transmitted infections in Kigali, Rwanda. They enrolled 705 participants who completed a study visit; of these 51 attended 53 additional visits. Compared with gold standard testing, the WISH algorithms showed good sensitivity and high specificity for C trachomatis, N gonorrhoeae, and T vaginalis, high sensitivity but low specificity for bacterial vaginosis, and moderate sensitivity and specificity for vulvovaginal candidiasis. By increasing the cutoff to 5·5, improvement in the performance of vaginal pH testing for bacterial vaginosis was noted, followed by confirmatory testing. Moderate sensitivity and poor specificity for all infections were noted for the WHO algorithms compared with gold standard testing. An improvement in case-finding and infection management could be achieved with point-of-care testing for urogenital infections and in resource-poor settings, this was noted as feasible.