ArticleCurrent infectious disease reports2005
Advances in diagnosing vaginitis: development of a new algorithm.
Article in Current infectious disease reports, 2005. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 21 citations in OpenAlex.
- Perspectives on Vaginal Ecology and Management of Recurrent Vulvovaginal Candidiasis: A Narrative Review.Journal of fungi (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Vaginal mycobiome characteristics and therapeutic strategies in vulvovaginal candidiasis (VVC): differentiating pathogenic species and microecological features for stratified treatment.Clinical microbiology reviews · 2025Review
- In Vitro Bactericidal Activity of a Neomycin-Polymyxin B-Nystatin Combination Compared to Metronidazole and Clindamycin Against the Main Bacteria Involved in Bacterial Vaginosis and Aerobic Vaginitis.Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Antibiotic use and misuse during pregnancy and delivery: benefits and risks.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2014Review
- Mixed vaginitis-more than coinfection and with therapeutic implications.Current infectious disease reports · 2013Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The current approach to diagnosing vulvovaginal symptoms is both flawed and inadequate. Mistakes occur at the level of the patient herself, her provider, and the sensitivity of office-based tests. Often, the differential diagnosis is so broad that providers may overlook some of the possibilities. A diagnostic algorithm which separates women into either a normal or elevated vaginal pH can successfully classify most women with vaginitis. Based on the amine test, vaginal leukocytes, and vaginal parabasal cells, those with an elevated pH can be placed into further diagnostic categories. Such an algorithm helps to prioritize different diagnoses and suggest appropriate ancillary tests.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.