Evidence map›Paper›PMID 16827943›Full record

ArticleBMC international health and human rights2006

Syphilis screening in the antenatal care: a cross-sectional study from Botswana.

Maria Romoren, Mafizur Rahman

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC international health and human rights, 2006. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
0.2field-weighted citation impact, top 42% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 12 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Barriers to antenatal syphilis screening in Burkina Faso.The Pan African medical journal · 2014
    Article
  6. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Maria RomorenDepartment of General Practice and Community Medicine, University of Oslo, Box 1130 Blindern, N-0318 Oslo, Norway. maria.romoren@medisin.uio.no
Mafizur Rahman
University of Oslo · NO

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundCongenital syphilis is recognized as a substantial public health problem in Sub-Saharan Africa. The aim of this study was to determine the prevalence of syphilis among antenatal care attendees in Botswana and to contribute to knowledge about the challenges facing the syphilis-screening programme.

methodsIn a cross-sectional study, 703 antenatal care attendees at 13 health facilities in Gaborone, Botswana were interviewed and examined. Venous blood samples were collected for the identification of syphilis infection. The antenatal records were used to obtain information on any screening, diagnosis and treatment of syphilis that had been done earlier in the current pregnancy.

resultsActive syphilis was found in 32 (5%) of the attendees. Among 546 women coming for a repeat antenatal care visit, 71 (13%) had not been screened for syphilis. Uptake late in pregnancy, delayed treatment and a high rate of seroconversion after testing were other identified obstacles to the effective prevention of congenital syphilis.

conclusionSyphilis prevalence among pregnant women in Botswana remains high, and there is still much to be gained by improving the effectiveness of the syphilis screening and treatment programme. Earlier antenatal care attendance, rapid on-site testing, improved partner treatment and a repeat test late in pregnancy to manage incident cases are important goals for patients, health care workers and health authorities.

Identifiers

PMID16827943
PMCPMC1538631
OpenAlexW2139961484

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.