Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34268137›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in cellular and infection microbiology2021

Assessing the Concordance Between Urogenital and Vaginal Microbiota: Can Urine Specimens Be Used as a Proxy for Vaginal Samples?

Sarah E Brown, Courtney K Robinson, Michelle D Shardell, Johanna B Holm, Jacques Ravel, Khalil G Ghanem, Rebecca M Brotman

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
1.8field-weighted citation impact, top 15% 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

11 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Female reproductive tract-organ axes.Frontiers in immunology · 2023
    Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2022
    Article
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.

Sarah E BrownInstitute for Genome Sciences, University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, United States.
Courtney K RobinsonInstitute for Genome Sciences, University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, United States.
Michelle D ShardellInstitute for Genome Sciences, University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, United States.
Johanna B HolmInstitute for Genome Sciences, University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, United States.
Jacques RavelInstitute for Genome Sciences, University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, United States.
Khalil G GhanemDivision of Infectious Diseases, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, United States.
Rebecca M BrotmanInstitute for Genome Sciences, University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, United States.
University of Maryland, Baltimore · USJohns Hopkins University · US

Funding

Lubricant Use and the Vaginal MicrobiomeR01AI119012 · NIAID · UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND BALTIMORE · PI BROTMAN, REBECCA M. · 2016 to 2020
$3.7M
Duration of Hormonal Contraceptive Use: Immune Responses & Vaginal MicrobiotaR01AI089878 · NIAID · JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY · PI GHANEM, KHALIL G · 2011 to 2015
$3.4M
Methods to Test the Role of Age-related Lifestyle and Vaginal Microenvironment Changes and the Prevention, Treatment, and Progression of Genitourinary Syndrome of MenopauseR01AG069915 · NIA · UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND BALTIMORE · PI REBECCA M. BROTMAN, Michelle Denise Shardell · 2021 to 2026
$3.1M
The Microbial Ecology of Bacterial Vaginosis: A Fine Scale Resolution MetagenomicUH2AI083264 · NIAID · UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND BALTIMORE · PI RAVEL, JACQUES · 2009 to 2011
$1.9M
NIAID NIH HHS R01 AI089878NIAID NIH HHS R01 AI119012NIAID NIH HHS UH2 AI083264NIA NIH HHS R01 AG069915
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: The vaginal microbiota play a key role in defense against reproductive tract infections; however, many population-based women's health studies do not collect vaginal samples. Molecular examinations of urine samples have revealed common vaginal bacteria. We sought to assess the extent that community state type assignments of archived random-catch and clean-catch urine samples agreed with the paired vaginal samples in both reproductive-age and peri/post-menopausal women. Results: Using archived samples, we evaluated the microbiota concordance among women in three studies: two with paired mid-vaginal/random-catch urine (N=91 reproductive-age participants and N=13 peri/post-menopausal participants), and one with paired mid-vaginal/clean-catch urine (N=99 reproductive-age participants). Microbiota composition was characterized by sequencing amplicons of the 16S rRNA gene V3-V4 regions and assigned to community state types. Similarity of paired samples was gauged using agreement of community state types and Yue-Clayton θ indices. Analysis of Composition of Microbiomes II indicated which taxa were differently relatively abundant in paired vaginal and urine samples. In reproductive-age women, random-catch and clean-catch urines were 89.0% and 86.9% concordant on five community state types with paired mid-vaginal swabs, and Kappa statistics indicated almost perfect agreement (κ Conclusions: Random-catch and clean-catch urine samples showed substantial agreement on bacterial composition to paired mid-vaginal samples, indicating that the genitourinary microbiota may be a reliable proxy for assessing the overall composition of the vaginal microbiota

Indexed as

MicrobiotaBacteriaFemaleHumansLactobacillusRNA, Ribosomal, 16SVaginaRNA, Ribosomal, 16S16S rRNA gene amplicon sequencingclean-catch urinecommunity state typerandom-catch urinevaginal microbiota

Identifiers

PMID34268137
PMCPMC8276069
OpenAlexW3175814848

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.