ArticleFrontiers in public health2022
The association between adverse pregnancy outcomes with genital
Article in Frontiers in public health, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- The global prevalence of Chlamydia trachomatis genital infection in pregnant women: a meta-analysis.Archives of gynecology and obstetrics · 2025Pooled it
- Global temporal trends and projections for the incidence of chlamydial infection among women of childbearing age over the next decade.Medicine · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: To investigate the prevalence of adverse pregnancy outcomes (APOs) in women and the impact of pre-pregnancy couples' genital Study design: Data on genital infections were collected from the Free Pre-pregnancy Health Check (FPHC) in Shenzhen, China. Data on APOs were collected from a 1-year telephone follow-up of pregnancy status and subsequent pregnancy outcomes. Methods: APO data were used to count adverse outcomes, and logistic regression was conducted to determine the association between APOs and GCT infection. Results: From December 2018 to December 2019, among 4,429 couples who underwent FPHC; 1,925 were pregnant, and 1,816 couples were tracked for pregnancy outcomes, including 1,471 normal pregnancies and 345 (19.00%) APOs. The rest of 109 pregnant couples did not answer the phone or refused to answer the pregnancy outcome during the follow-up. Among APOs, the number of spontaneous abortions was 122 (35.36%), the number of macrosomia was 85 (24.64%), the number of low birth weight (LBW) & preterm births (PTB) was 39 (11.30%), the number of LBW was 34 (9.86%), and the number of PTB was 31 (8.99%). The prevalence of GCT infection in females and males was 4.24% [95% Confidence Interval, (CI): 3.41-5.27%] and 3.58% (95% CI: 2.79-4.57%), respectively. More than half (52.69%, 49/93) of the couples were GCT-concordant. The prevalence of APOs in couples without GCT infection was 18.74% (332/1,772). The prevalence of APOs in female GCT-discordant was 32.14% (9/28), and the prevalence of APOs in male GCT-discordant was 25% (4/16). The prevalence of APOs in GCT-concordant was 12.24% (6/49). Multivariable analysis indicated that females 30-35 years old [adjusted Odds Ratio (aOR) = 1.08, 95% CI: 1.01-1.17] and over 35 years old (aOR = 1.16, 95% CI: 1.03-1.32) were more likely to experiencing APOs. Conclusion: Although only women's age was found to be associated with APOs, the prevalence of APOs with GCT-discordant in couples, especially female GCT-discordant, was higher than in those without infection or who were GCT-concordant, suggesting that these groups, especially in older women, should be paid more attention to in follow-ups to improve reproductive health.
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.