ArticleRevista colombiana de obstetricia y ginecologia2022
Adherence to recommendations for preventing early neonatal sepsis associated with Streptococcus agalactiae colonization in a referral center in Bogotá, Colombia, 2019
Article in Revista colombiana de obstetricia y ginecologia, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Rapid tests for detecting group B streptococcus colonization in pregnant women: A systematic review and meta-analysis of diagnostic accuracy.International journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics · 2026Pooled it
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: To assess adherence to screening recommendations for the prevention of neonatal sepsis, and describe the prevalence of colonization by Group B streptococcus (GBS) as well as the perinatal outcomes associated with colonization by this bacterium. Material and methods: Retrospective cohort study that included pregnant women at term and their newborns, seen at a private high-complexity clinic in Bogota, between July 1 and December 31, 2019. Adherence to screening and intrapartum antibiotic prophylaxis in pregnant women colonized with group B streptococcus, as well as the prevalence of colonization and early adverse perinatal outcomes were assessed. Results: Overall, 1928 women were included. Adherence to screening was 68.0 % (95 % CI: 66-70.1) and 87.9 % to intrapartum antibiotic administration (95 % CI: 87.8-88); non-indicated use of antibiotics occurred in 14.7 % of the women, for 86.3 % final adherence to antibiotic prophylaxis. The prevalence of GBS colonization was 12.5 % (95 % CI: 10.7-14.3); the incidence of neonatal hospitalization was 27.5 % (95 % CI: 16.3-33.7). There were no cases of mortality or early neonatal sepsis attributable to screening status, colonization or prophylactic antibiotics for GBS. Conclusions: Additional studies in other centers are required in order to determine adherence to this guideline, particularly in those that receive users affiliated to the subsidized regime which covers the most vulnerable population. Also, new population studies of GBS prevalence and cost-effectiveness of universal screening compared to risk factor-based antibiotic prophylaxis are needed.
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.