ArticleMedical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research2021
Characteristics and Related Factors of High-Risk Human Papillomavirus Infection in Pregnant Women.
Article in Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Evaluation of the Efficacy of Human Papillomavirus Screening Compared With Cytology Screening in Pregnant Women: Protocol for a Prospective Multicenter Trial.JMIR research protocols · 2026Article
- Epidemiological characteristics and risk factors of high-risk HPV infection, cervical cancer, and precancerous lesions among women in Southwestern China.Frontiers in oncology · 2025Article
- Effect of a Second Pregnancy on the HPV Serology in Mothers Followed Up in the Finnish Family HPV Study.Viruses · 2023Article
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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND Cervical cancer is a risk for women worldwide. The aim of this study was to examine the occurrence of high-risk human papillomavirus (HR-HPV) infection and its related factors in pregnant women and provide a scientific basis for the targeted prevention and treatment of cervical cancer in pregnant women. MATERIAL AND METHODS A total of 1774 pregnant women were included, and 1774 non-pregnant women were selected as controls. Cervical exfoliated cells were collected from all women for HR-HPV (AptimaE6, E7mRNA) and ThinPrep cytologic testing, and the vaginal discharge of all pregnant women was tested for pH level and routine pathogenic microorganisms. RESULTS The HPV-16-positive and HPV-16/18/45-positive rates in pregnant women were higher than those of non-pregnant women (P<0.05). There was a statistically significant difference in HR-HPV-positive rate, HPV-16-positive rate, and non-HPV-16/18/45-positive rate among pregnant women of different ages (P<0.05). There was a statistically significant difference in HR-HPV-positive rate and non-HPV-16/18/45-positive rate in the first, second, and third trimester (P<0.05). The HR-HPV-positive rate, HPV-16-positive rate, HPV-18/45-positive rate, and non-HPV-16/18/45-positive rate of pregnant women with concurrent infection were higher than those in women without concurrent infection (P<0.05). The HR-HPV-positive and HPV-16/18/45-positive rates in pregnant women were associated with cytologic examination results (P<0.05). CONCLUSIONS The overall infection rates of HR-HPV-16 and HR-HPV-18/45 in pregnant women were higher than those in non-pregnant women. The gestation period was found to be a susceptible period for infection with HR-HPV, and we recommend the implementation of cervical cancer screening based on HR-HPV testing in pregnant women.
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.