SynthesisBMJ clinical evidence2008
Pelvic inflammatory disease.
Synthesis in BMJ clinical evidence, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- How the Cervical Microbiota Contributes to Cervical Cancer Risk in Sub-Saharan Africa.Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2020Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionPelvic inflammatory disease is caused by infection of the upper female genital tract and is often asymptomatic. Pelvic inflammatory disease is the most common gynaecological reason for admission to hospital in the USA and is diagnosed in almost 2% of women aged 16-45 years consulting their GP in England and Wales. METHODS AND OUTCOMES: We conducted a systematic review and aimed to answer the following clinical questions: What are the effects of empirical treatment compared with treatment delayed until the results of microbiological investigations are known? How do different antimicrobial regimens compare? What are the effects of routine antibiotic prophylaxis to prevent pelvic inflammatory disease before intrauterine contraceptive device (IUD)8 insertion? We searched: Medline, Embase, The Cochrane Library and other important databases up to May 2007 (Clinical Evidence reviews are updated periodically, please check our website for the most up-to-date version of this review). We included harms alerts from relevant organisations such as the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the UK Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA).
resultsWe found 9 systematic reviews, RCTs or observational studies that met our inclusion criteria. We performed a GRADE evaluation of the quality of evidence for interventions.
conclusionsIn this systematic review we present information relating to the effectiveness and safety of the following interventions: antibiotics (oral, parenteral, empirical treatment, treatment guided by test results, different durations, outpatient, inpatient), and routine antibiotic prophylaxis (before intrauterine device insertion in women at high risk or low risk).
Indexed as
Identifiers
19450319PMC2907941What 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.