ReviewMolecular diagnosis & therapy2013
Molecular-based screening for perinatal group B streptococcal infection: implications for prevention and therapy.
Review in Molecular diagnosis & therapy, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Development of a melting-curve based multiplex real-time PCR assay for simultaneous detection of Streptococcus agalactiae and genes encoding resistance to macrolides and lincosamides.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Group B streptococci (GBS) are a leading cause of infectious neonatal morbidity and mortality. Timely and accurate identification of colonized pregnant women is imperative to implement intrapartum antibioprophylaxis (IAP) to reduce the risk of early neonatal sepsis. Current guidelines recommend screening for GBS carriage with vaginal-rectal cultures. However, cultures require 24-72 h, thus precluding their use for intrapartum screening and these are only performed at 35-37 weeks gestation. New rapid molecular-based tests can detect GBS within hours. They have the potential to be used intrapartum and to allow for selective IAP in women carrying GBS. An advantage is that they can sometimes be performed by non-laboratory staff in the labor suite, thus avoiding delays in sample transfers to the microbiology laboratory. Another possible use of molecular-based assays is for the diagnosis of neonatal sepsis, where tests with a short turnaround time and high sensitivity and specificity are crucial. In this situation, the detection of microorganisms once antibiotic therapy has already been started is important, as treatment is started immediately once sepsis is suspected without waiting for microbiological confirmation. In this article, we discuss the state-of-the-art molecular-based tests available for GBS screening during pregnancy, as well as their implications for IAP for the diagnosis and prevention of neonatal sepsis.
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.