ArticleWorld journal of clinical cases2022
Influence of group B
Article in World journal of clinical cases, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- The correlation between vaginal pathogens and high-risk human papilloma virus infection: a meta-analysis of case-control studies.Frontiers in oncology · 2024Pooled it
- Article
- Clinical analysis of association between vaginal microbiota indicators and HPV infection.Frontiers in global women's health · 2026Article
- Unveiling the microbial shift: the impact of group B Streptococcus on vaginal microbiota and inflammation in late pregnancy.BMC microbiology · 2025Article
- Infection characteristics and risk factors in ovarian cancer patients with concomitant vaginitis.American journal of translational research · 2025Article
- Vaginal microbes confounders and implications on women's health.World journal of clinical cases · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe vaginal microbiome plays a critical role in the health of pregnant women and their newborns. Group B
aimTo explore the effects of GBS status and vaginal cleanliness on vaginal microecosystems.
methodsWe collected 160 vaginal swabs from pregnant women and divided them into the following four groups based on GBS status and vaginal cleanliness: GBS-positive + vaginal cleanliness I-II degree, GBS-negative + vaginal cleanliness I-II degree, GBS-positive + vaginal cleanliness III-IV degree, and GBS-negative + vaginal cleanliness III-IV degree. Samples were subjected to 16S rRNA gene amplicon sequencing.
resultsAlpha diversity analysis showed that the Shannon index did not significantly differ between the four groups. We identified significant variation in taxa abundance between the GBS-positive and GBS-negative groups and between the vaginal cleanliness I-II degree and III-IV degree groups. Principal coordinate analysis and non-metric multidimensional scaling analysis further confirmed the microbial diversity of the four groups. Moreover, the linear discriminant analysis demonstrated that
conclusionGBS status and vaginal cleanliness significantly affect vaginal microbiome differences in pregnant women. Our findings provide instructional information for clinical antibiotic treatment in pregnant women with different GBS statuses and vaginal cleanliness degrees.
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.