ArticleMaternal and child health journal2009
Prenatal screening for infectious diseases: an analysis of disparities and adherence to policy in California.
Article in Maternal and child health journal, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Sociodemographic Factors Affecting Loss to Follow-Up After Newborn Hearing Screening: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Otolaryngology--head and neck surgery : official journal of American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery · 2023Pooled it
- Syphilis testing adherence among women with livebirth deliveries: Indianapolis 2014-2016.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2021Article
- Poor Adherence to the Screening-Based Strategy of Group B Streptococcus Despite Colonization of Pregnant Women in Greece.Pathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
- Trends and correlates of HIV testing during pregnancy in racially/ethnically diverse insured population, 1997-2006.Maternal and child health journal · 2009Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesPrenatal infectious diseases are a major cause of mortality and morbidity among newborns, but many are preventable with proper maternal screening and treatment. METHODS; Adherence to prenatal infectious disease screening guidelines and demographic factors that influence adherence were determined utilizing existing data on 1837 live births from 1999-2003.
resultsWe found higher rates of testing for syphilis (94.54%), rubella (92.69%) and hepatitis B (94.23%) than for HIV (73.82%) and GBS (69.05%). Adherence to testing guidelines varied by both disease and maternal factors. Lack of insurance, geographic location, inadequate prenatal care and incarceration were the main maternal factors associated with lack of testing.
conclusionsDisease screening rates may be improved by reducing socioeconomic barriers to prenatal testing, supporting access to insurance, eliminating provider biases and providing adequate prenatal care.
Indexed as
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.