Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36624297›Full record

ArticleEuropean journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology2023

Optimal sampling and analysis methods for clinical diagnostics of vaginal microbiome.

Katja Kero, Niina Hieta, Teemu Kallonen, Anne Ahtikoski, Hanna K Laine, Jaana Rautava, Eveliina Munukka

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
2.0field-weighted citation impact, top 15% 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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. The impact of fluconazole use on the fungal and bacterial microbiomes in recurrent Vulvovaginal Candidiasis (RVVC): a pilot study of vaginal and gastrointestinal site interplay.European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology · 2025
    Article
  4. The vaginal microbiome in HPV persistence and cervical cancer progression.Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2025
    Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Interactions between microbiota and cervical epithelial, immune, and mucus barrier.Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2023
    Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Katja KeroDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Turku University Hospital, University of Turku, Turku, Finland.
Niina HietaDepartment of Dermatology, Turku University Hospital, University of Turku, Turku, Finland.
Teemu KallonenResearch Center for Cancer, Infections and Immunity, Institute of Biomedicine, University of Turku, Turku, Finland.
Anne AhtikoskiDepartment of Pathology, Turku University Hospital, University of Turku, Turku, Finland.
Hanna K LaineDepartment of Oral Pathology and Oral Radiology, Institute of Dentistry, Faculty of Medicine, University of Turku, Turku, Finland. hanna.k.laine@helsinki.fi.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8156-6820
Jaana RautavaDepartment of Oral Pathology and Oral Radiology, Institute of Dentistry, Faculty of Medicine, University of Turku, Turku, Finland.
Eveliina MunukkaInstitute of Biomedicine, Microbiome Biobank, University of Turku, Turku, Finland.
University of Turku · FIUniversity of Helsinki · FI

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Next-generation sequencing-based microbiological analysis is a complex way to profile vaginal microbiome samples since each step affects the results gained. Methodologies for sample collection lack golden standards. We compared Puritan DNA/RNA swab (PS) and Copan FLOQ swab (CS) and provided consistent and reliable microbiome profiles analyzed by 16S rRNA gene sequencing. We collected two consecutive vaginal samples utilizing PS with room temperature storing and CS with instant freezing from 26 women. Variable region 4 of bacterial 16S rRNA gene was amplified with single PCR by custom-designed dual-indexed primers and sequenced with Illumina MiSeq system. Read quality control, operational taxonomic unit tables, and alpha and beta diversities analysis were performed, and community richness, diversity, and evenness were evaluated and compared between the two samplings and tests. Nineteen sample pairs produced detectable, intact DNA during the extraction protocol and/or further microbial profiles. Alpha bacterial diversity indices were independent on the collection protocol. No significant statistical differences were found in the measured beta diversity metrics between the collection methods. Of the women, 43% had Lactobacillus-dominated vaginal microbiome profile despite of collection method. Previously reported important vaginal microbiome phyla Actinobacteria, Bacteroidetes, Firmicutes, Fusobacteria, and Proteobacteria were present in the sample set although their relative abundances varied among individuals. PS and CS enable constant vaginal microbiota sampling. The PS method with no need for instant freezing is suitable for on-site collections at clinics. Furthermore, it seems to be possible to take two samples instead of one with constant microbiological results.

Indexed as

MicrobiotaBacteriaFemaleHumansRNA, Ribosomal, 16SSpecimen HandlingVaginaRNA, Ribosomal, 16SBacterial 16S rRNA geneMicrobial diagnostics samplingNext-generation sequencingVaginal microbiomeVaginal microbiota

Identifiers

PMID36624297
PMCPMC9837015
OpenAlexW4313880512

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.