ArticleCureus2021
Do Blood-Borne Viruses Affect the Progression of Labor: A Hospital-Based Pilot Study.
Article in Cureus, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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 Blood-borne viruses form the basis of enormous research on universal precautions. A paucity of research is noted regarding labor progression in seropositive women. Women testing positive for human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)/hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg)/hepatitis C virus (HCV) are often denied obstetric care and referred. Their need for safe delivery conditions propelled us to undertake this study to establish whether seropositive status affects labor progression or not. Methods Women in early labor (<4 cm cervical dilation) testing positive for HIV/HBV/HCV and delivering vaginally during the study period at All India Institute of Medical Sciences (AIIMS), Rishikesh, India, were included as Group A (n=36). The authors recruited an equal number of women with seronegative status with comparable age, parity, admission at or before 4 cm, body mass index (BMI) characteristics as Group B. They were compared in terms of effacement at 4 cm dilatation and time from 4 cm dilatation till delivery. Results The authors report a significant difference (p <0.05) between time to delivery between the two groups (2 hours vs. 2.43 hours in nulligravidas and multigravidas, respectively). Thirty-two (32) of 36 cases were already 70%-80% effaced at 4 cm dilation while only 25% of controls had similar findings. The present study suggests that seropositive women progress significantly faster in labor and need vigilant monitoring. We report such findings for the first time and aim to encourage similar research worldwide.
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.