Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23319852›Full record

ArticleInfectious diseases in obstetrics and gynecology2012

A first look at chorioamnionitis management practice variation among US obstetricians.

Mara B Greenberg, Britta L Anderson, Jay Schulkin, Mary E Norton, Natali Aziz

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Infectious diseases in obstetrics and gynecology, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
25citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.6field-weighted citation impact, top 16% 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

25 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 62 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Revisiting restricted reproductive rights in 2025: what do we need to know now?Antimicrobial stewardship & healthcare epidemiology : ASHE · 2025
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Management of clinical chorioamnionitis: an evidence-based approach.American journal of obstetrics and gynecology · 2020
    Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. What's the harm? Risks and benefits of evolving rule-out sepsis practices.Journal of perinatology : official journal of the California Perinatal Association · 2018
    Review
  19. Article
  20. Review
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

5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Mara B GreenbergDivision of Maternal Fetal Medicine, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Lucile Packard Children's Hospital at Stanford, Stanford University, 300 Pasteur Drive HH333, Stanford, CA 94305, USA. mbgreenberg@yahoo.com
Britta L Anderson
Jay Schulkin
Mary E Norton
Natali Aziz
American Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists · USLucile Packard Children's Hospital · USStanford University · US

Funding

PHS HHS UA6MC19010
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objective. To examine practice patterns for diagnosis and treatment of chorioamnionitis among US obstetricians. Study Design. We distributed a mail-based survey to members of the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, querying demographics, practice setting, and chorioamnionitis management strategies. We performed univariable and multivariable analyses. Results. Of 500 surveys distributed, 53.8% were returned, and 212 met study criteria and were analyzed. Most respondents work in group practice (66.0%), perform >100 deliveries per year (60.0%), have been in practice >10 years (77.3%), and work in a nonuniversity setting (85.1%). Temperature plus one additional criterion (61.3%) was the most common diagnostic strategy. Over 25 different primary antibiotic regimens were reported, including use of a single agent by 30.0% of respondents. A wide range of postpartum antibiotic duration was reported from no postpartum treatment (34.5% after vaginal delivery, 11.3% after cesarean delivery) to 48 hours of postpartum treatment (24.7% after vaginal delivery, 32.1% after cesarean delivery). No practitioner characteristic was independently associated with diagnostic or therapeutic strategies in multivariable analysis. Conclusion. There is a wide variation in contemporary clinical practices for the management of chorioamnionitis. This may represent a dearth of level I evidence. Future prospective clinical trials may provide more evidence-based practice recommendations for diagnosis and treatment of chorioamnionitis.

Indexed as

AdultAnti-Bacterial AgentsChorioamnionitisDelivery, ObstetricFemaleHealth Care SurveysHumansMaleMiddle AgedObstetricsPractice Guidelines as TopicPractice Patterns, Physicians'PregnancyRegression AnalysisSurveys and QuestionnairesUnited StatesAnti-Bacterial Agents

Identifiers

PMID23319852
PMCPMC3540735
OpenAlexW2158415174

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.