Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26877884›Full record

ReviewMilitary Medical Research2016

Bacterial vaginosis: a synthesis of the literature on etiology, prevalence, risk factors, and relationship with chlamydia and gonorrhea infections.

Christian T Bautista, Eyako Wurapa, Warren B Sateren, Sara Morris, Bruce Hollingsworth, Jose L Sanchez

Open access · diamondAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Military Medical Research, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 112 papers, 7 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
112citing papers in PubMed, 7 pooled it
15.6field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

112 citing papers in PubMed, 7 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 239 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Contribution ofFrontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2021
    Pooled it
  8. Trial
  9. Orally administratedFrontiers in immunology · 2023
    Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Trial
  13. Trial
  14. Comparative phase I randomized open-label pilot clinical trial of GynophilusEuropean journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology · 2018
    Trial
  15. Trial
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Observational

52 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

6 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Christian T BautistaDivision of Health Research, Lancaster University, Lancaster, UK.
Eyako WurapaWalter Reed Army Institute of Research, Maryland, USA.
Warren B SaterenWalter Reed Army Institute of Research, Maryland, USA.
Sara MorrisDivision of Health Research, Lancaster University, Lancaster, UK.
Bruce HollingsworthDivision of Health Research, Lancaster University, Lancaster, UK.
Jose L SanchezArmed Forces Health Surveillance Center and Cherokee Nation Technology Solutions, Maryland, USA.
Lancaster University · GBWalter Reed Army Institute of Research · USCherokee Nation · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Bacterial vaginosis (BV) is a common vaginal disorder in women of reproductive age. Since the initial work of Leopoldo in 1953 and Gardner and Dukes in 1955, researchers have not been able to identify the causative etiologic agent of BV. There is increasing evidence, however, that BV occurs when Lactobacillus spp., the predominant species in healthy vaginal flora, are replaced by anaerobic bacteria, such as Gardenella vaginalis, Mobiluncus curtisii, M. mulieris, other anaerobic bacteria and/or Mycoplasma hominis. Worldwide, it estimated that 20-30 % of women of reproductive age attending sexually transmitted infection (STI) clinics suffer from BV, and that its prevalence can be as high as 50-60 % in high-risk populations (e.g., those who practice commercial sex work (CSW). Epidemiological data show that women are more likely to report BV if they: 1) have had a higher number of lifetime sexual partners; 2) are unmarried; 3) have engaged in their first intercourse at a younger age; 4) have engaged in CSW, and 5) practice regular douching. In the past decade, several studies have provided evidence on the contribution of sexual activity to BV. However, it is difficult to state that BV is a STI without being able to identify the etiologic agent. BV has also emerged as a public health problem due to its association with other STIs, including: human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), herpes simplex virus type 2 (HSV-2), Chlamydia trachomatis (CT) and Neisseria gonorrhoeae (NG). The most recent evidence on the association between BV and CT/NG infection comes from two secondary analyses of cohort data conducted among women attending STI clinics. Based on these studies, women with BV had a 1.8 and 1.9-fold increased risk for NG and CT infection, respectively. Taken together, BV is likely a risk factor or at least an important contributor to subsequent NG or CT infection in high-risk women. Additional research is required to determine whether this association is also present in other low-risk sexually active populations, such as among women in the US military. It is essential to conduct large scale cross-sectional or population-based case-control studies to investigate the role of BV as a risk factor for CT/NG infections. These studies could lead to the development of interventions aimed at reducing the burden associated with bacterial STIs worldwide.

Indexed as

Bacterial vaginosisChlamydiaEpidemiologyGonorrheaMilitarySTI

Identifiers

PMID26877884
PMCPMC4752809
OpenAlexW2252941498

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.