Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36028274›Full record

SynthesisBMJ open2022

Adverse pregnancy and birth outcomes associated with

Marinjho Emely Jonduo, Lisa Michelle Vallely, Handan Wand, Emma Louise Sweeney, Dianne Egli-Gany, John Kaldor, Andrew John Vallely, Nicola Low

Erratum issuedOpen access · goldAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMJ open, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 44 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
44citing papers in PubMed
7.6field-weighted citation impact, top 2% 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

44 citing papers in PubMed, 61 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. International journal of molecular sciences · 2026
    Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Prevalence ofInfectious disease reports · 2026
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. [Advances in clinical pharmacotherapy for neonatalZhongguo dang dai er ke za zhi = Chinese journal of contemporary pediatrics · 2025
    Review
  14. Review
  15. Cervicovaginal microbial features predictInfection and immunity · 2025
    Article
  16. Prevalence ofEpidemiology and infection · 2025
    Article
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 3 institutions in 4 countries.

Marinjho Emely JonduoGlobal Health Program, The Kirby Institute, University of New South Wales, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-8625-8488
Lisa Michelle VallelyGlobal Health Program, The Kirby Institute, University of New South Wales, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-8247-7683
Handan WandBiostatistics and Databases Program, The Kirby Institute, University of New South Wales, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-8279-7652
Emma Louise SweeneyInfectious Diseases Unit, The University of Queensland Centre for Clinical Research, Herston, Queensland, Australia.
Dianne Egli-GanyInstitute of Social and Preventive Medicine, University of Bern, Bern, Bern, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0002-4725-0475
John KaldorGlobal Health Program, The Kirby Institute, University of New South Wales, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
Andrew John VallelyGlobal Health Program, The Kirby Institute, University of New South Wales, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-1558-4822
Nicola LowInstitute of Social and Preventive Medicine, University of Bern, Bern, Bern, Switzerland nicola.low@ispm.unibe.ch.ORCID 0000-0003-4817-8986
UNSW Sydney · AUUniversity of Bern · CHThe University of Queensland · AU

Funding

Wellcome Trust
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectives

methodsWe searched Embase, Medline and CINAHL databases from January 1971 to February 2021. Eligible studies tested for any of the three genital mycoplasmas during pregnancy and reported on the primary outcome, preterm birth (PTB) and/or secondary outcomes low birth weight (LBW), premature rupture of membranes (PROM), spontaneous abortion (SA) and/or perinatal or neonatal death (PND).Two reviewers independently screened titles and abstracts, read potentially eligible full texts and extracted data. Two reviewers independently assessed risks of bias using published checklists. Random effects meta-analysis was used to estimate summary ORs (with 95% CIs and prediction intervals). Multivariable and stratified analyses were synthesised descriptively.

resultsOf 57/1194 included studies, 39 were from high-income countries. In meta-analysis of unadjusted ORs,

conclusionsThe currently available literature does not allow conclusions about the role of mycoplasmas in adverse pregnancy and birth outcomes, alone or with coexisting BV. Future studies that consider genital mycoplasmas in the context of the vaginal microbiome are needed. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42016050962.

Indexed as

Mycoplasma InfectionsPregnancy Complications, InfectiousPremature BirthVaginosis, BacterialFemaleHumansInfant, NewbornMycoplasma hominisPregnancyUreaplasmaUreaplasma urealyticumEpidemiologyEPIDEMIOLOGYGYNAECOLOGYMICROBIOLOGYOBSTETRICS

Identifiers

PMID36028274
PMCPMC9422885
OpenAlexW4293124576

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.