Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31186607›Full record

Observational studyInfectious diseases in obstetrics and gynecology2019

Asymptomatic Bacterial Vaginosis in Pregnancy and Missed Opportunities for Treatment: A Cross-Sectional Observational Study.

Nkosinathi Joyisa, Dhayendre Moodley, Thandeka Nkosi, Raesetja Talakgale, Motshedisi Sebitloane, Megeshnee Naidoo, Quarraisha Abdool Karim

Open access · hybridAbstract readObservational Study
In one paragraph

Observational study in Infectious diseases in obstetrics and gynecology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
2.9field-weighted citation impact, top 9% 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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 32 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Review
  5. Observational
  6. Article
  7. Observational
  8. Observational
  9. Article
  10. The impact of the duration of HAART on cytokine profiles in pregnancy.Inflammation research : official journal of the European Histamine Research Society ... [et al.] · 2020
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Bacterial Vaginosis: Current Diagnostic Avenues and Future Opportunities.Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2020
    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

7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Nkosinathi JoyisaDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, School of Clinical Medicine, University of KwaZulu-Natal, Durban, South Africa.
Dhayendre MoodleyDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, School of Clinical Medicine, University of KwaZulu-Natal, Durban, South Africa.ORCID 0000-0003-1849-9631
Thandeka NkosiCentre for the AIDS Programme of Research in South Africa, Durban, South Africa.
Raesetja TalakgaleCentre for the AIDS Programme of Research in South Africa, Durban, South Africa.
Motshedisi SebitloaneDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, School of Clinical Medicine, University of KwaZulu-Natal, Durban, South Africa.
Megeshnee NaidooCentre for the AIDS Programme of Research in South Africa, Durban, South Africa.
Quarraisha Abdool KarimCentre for the AIDS Programme of Research in South Africa, Durban, South Africa.
Centre for the AIDS Programme of Research in South Africa · ZAUniversity of KwaZulu-Natal · ZA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: High rates of bacterial vaginosis (BV) have been described in nonpregnant South African women. Studies of BV in South African pregnant women are sparse. Diagnosis and prompt treatment of BV in pregnancy are expected to have a positive impact on pregnancy outcomes and HIV prevention. This study was undertaken to determine the prevalence of BV in pregnant women in a high HIV burden periurban setting in KwaZulu-Natal and explore how to enhance BV diagnosis in this setting where syndromic management of sexually transmitted diseases is the standard of care. Methods: In this cross-sectional study, consenting HIV uninfected pregnant women were examined for abnormal vaginal discharge; nurses determined the vaginal pH and collected a vaginal swab for Gram-stain and Nugent scoring. Findings: Among 750 HIV uninfected pregnant women, 280 (37.3%; 95%CI 33.9-40.9) tested positive for BV. Using a vaginal pH > 4.4, 65% of women with BV were correctly identified, while an abnormal vaginal discharge correctly identified a significantly lower proportion (52.9%) of women with BV (p=0.005). The sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values of vaginal pH testing were 65.9% (95%CI 60.0 - 71.5%), 61.4% (95%CI 56.8 - 65.9%), and 50.1% and 75.4%, respectively. The 20-24 year-old pregnant women were twice more likely to test positive for BV than the adolescent pregnant women (43.6% vs 21.1%) (p = 0.037) and BV was not associated with the duration of a sexual relationship, frequency of unprotected sex during pregnancy, number of lifetime sex partners, or the partner's age. Conclusion: There is a high burden of primarily asymptomatic BV in HIV uninfected pregnant women in this periurban setting. Both the sensitivity and specificity of vaginal pH testing are superior to the symptomatic diagnosis of BV but not good enough to be used as a screening tool.

Indexed as

AdolescentAdultCohort StudiesCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleHumansMiddle AgedPregnancyPregnancy Complications, InfectiousPrevalenceVaginosis, BacterialYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID31186607
PMCPMC6521388
OpenAlexW2943774125

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.