ArticlePopulation health management2020
Physician Awareness and Adherence to Clinical Practice Guidelines in the Diagnosis of Vaginitis Patients: A Retrospective Chart Review.
Article in Population health management, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 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
15 citing papers in PubMed, 22 citations in OpenAlex.
- Randomized Study of Usual Care Versus Xpert ® Xpress Multiplex Vaginal Panel at the Point-of-Care for Accurate Diagnosis and Appropriate Treatment of Vaginal Infections.Sexually transmitted diseases · 2026Trial
- Comparing BD Affirm VPIII to Xpert Xpress MVP and BD MAX Vaginal Panel for the diagnosis of vaginal infections.Microbiology spectrum · 2026Article
- Old but gold: an historical perspective of wet mount microscopy and its current role for the diagnosis of vaginitis.Frontiers in reproductive health · 2026Review
- Genital cutaneous candidiasis versus chronic recurrent vulvovaginal candidiasis: distinct diseases, different populations.Clinical microbiology reviews · 2025Review
- Real-world clinical burden of patients presenting with vaginitis symptoms in the United States.AJOG global reports · 2025Article
- Utilization of Syndromic Vaginitis Diagnostic Testing Reduces 6-Month Follow-Up Outpatient Service Healthcare Costs-A Real-World Data Analysis.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Rapid Molecular Diagnostics in Vulvovaginal Candidosis.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
- Article
- Prevalence, Associated Factors, and Appropriateness of Empirical Treatment of Trichomoniasis, Bacterial Vaginosis, and Vulvovaginal Candidiasis among Women with Vaginitis.Microbiology spectrum · 2023Article
- Diagnostic performance of an automated microscopy and pH test for diagnosis of vaginitis.NPJ digital medicine · 2023Article
- Survey of healthcare providers' testing practices for vulvovaginal candidiasis and treatment outcomes-United States, 2021.PloS one · 2022Article
- Management of recurrent vulvovaginal candidosis: Narrative review of the literature and European expert panel opinion.Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2022Review
- Recent Advances in Presentation, Diagnosis and Treatment for Mixed Vaginitis.Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2021Review
- Clinical Evaluation of a Self-Testing Kit for Vaginal Infection Diagnosis.Journal of healthcare engineering · 2021Article
- Improving the Diagnosis of Vulvovaginitis: Perspectives to Align Practice, Guidelines, and Awareness.Population health management · 2020Article
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 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Vaginitis is one of the main causes of primary care and gynecological visits in the United States. The most common infectious causes are bacterial vaginosis (BV), vulvovaginal candidiasis (VVC), and trichomoniasis. A physician survey was conducted to measure awareness of vaginitis clinical guidelines and availability of in-office point-of-care (POC) diagnostic tools. Participants were asked to perform a chart review to evaluate diagnostic practices for their symptomatic vaginitis patients. A total of 333 physicians and 984 patient charts were included. Physicians were most familiar with VVC and BV diagnostic guidelines; fewer than half were aware of current trichomoniasis guidelines. Although access to POC tools used to evaluate and diagnose vaginitis varied by practice, there was limited access to all 3 tools (microscope, pH test strips, potassium hydroxide solution) required to perform a full Amsel workup for BV (47% obstetricians/gynecologists vs. 32% primary care physicians,
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.