ArticleEuropean journal of pediatrics2015
Comparison of pre- and intrapartum screening of group B streptococci and adherence to screening guidelines: a cohort study.
Article in European journal of pediatrics, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 3 of them syntheses 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
15 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Rapid tests for detecting group B streptococcus colonization in pregnant women: A systematic review and meta-analysis of diagnostic accuracy.International journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics · 2026Pooled it
- Transmission routes of antibiotic resistant bacteria: a systematic review.BMC infectious diseases · 2022Pooled it
- Maternal Colonization With Group B Streptococcus and Serotype Distribution Worldwide: Systematic Review and Meta-analyses.Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America · 2017Pooled it
- Time to rethink prevention of neonatal group B streptococcal disease.Seminars in immunopathology · 2026Review
- Gene Factors and Serotypes Related to Polysaccharide and Protein-Based Candidate Vaccines AmongCurrent issues in molecular biology · 2026Article
- Article
- Maternal Streptococcus agalactiae colonization in Europe: data from the multi-center DEVANI study.Infection · 2025Article
- Persistent reduction ofFrontiers in immunology · 2025Article
- How can we reduce neonatal sepsis after universal group B streptococcus screening?BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2024Article
- Adherence to screening and management guidelines of maternal Group B Streptococcus colonization in pregnancy.Journal of advanced nursing · 2022Article
- Adherence to recommendations for preventing early neonatal sepsis associated with Streptococcus agalactiae colonization in a referral center in Bogotá, Colombia, 2019Revista colombiana de obstetricia y ginecologia · 2022Article
- Group B Streptococcus Screening Guidelines in Pregnancy: A Critical Review of Compliance.Maternal and child health journal · 2021Review
- Prevalence and Clinical Significance ofInfectious diseases in obstetrics and gynecology · 2018Article
- Management of group b streptococcus-positive pregnant women at maternity homes in JAPAN: a questionnaire survey of compliance among midwives.Maternal health, neonatology and perinatology · 2018Article
- Barriers and facilitators related to the uptake of four strategies to prevent neonatal early-onset group B haemolytic streptococcus disease: a qualitative study.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
unlabelledImplementation of guidelines for group B streptococcal (GBS) prepartum screening (PS) rarely has been prospectively evaluated. To assess PS at 35-37 weeks of gestation and compare its predictive value to that of an intrapartum screening (IS) within 7 days of delivery, a surveillance cohort study was conducted at a tertiary care center in Freiburg, Germany, during 2011-2012. Study participants included 937 pregnant women who had intrapartum cultures taken for vaginal and rectal GBS colonization. Colonization status was compared to PS, and intrapartum antibiotic prophylaxis (IAP) rates calculated. The neonates were tested for GBS transmission via cultures from their throats and external ear canals. While 67.5% (633/937) of study participants had a PS, only 22.7% (144/633) underwent a fully guideline-compatible PS. However, maternal GBS colonization rates were similar when comparing PS (18.5% [117/633]) versus IS (17.0% [133/784]). The positive predictive value of a positive PS result for GBS positivity at delivery was 77.2 %. Women with a positive PS received IAP in 89.3% of cases (75/84). The capsular serotype distribution pattern of colonizing GBS strains has not changed in comparison to our 2003-2004 study--one with a similar study design.
conclusionsImproved strategies for adoption of prepartum GBS screening are needed. WHAT IS KNOWN: • The prediction of prepartum GBS screening for intrapartum colonization status has not been well studied. • Longitudinal studies of GBS screening are needed for screening program evaluations and vaccine development. What is New: • The rate of GBS screening has improved over 10 years, and intrapartum GBS colonization prediction was accurate. • Serotype distribution was stable and suggests the potential long-term efficacy of GBS vaccines.
Indexed as
Identifiers
25922140What 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.