ArticleHealthcare (Basel, Switzerland)2023
Evaluation of Midwives' Practises on Herpetic Infections during Pregnancy: A French Vignette-Based Study.
Article in Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
- Editorial for Special Issue "Maternal, Fetal and Neonatal Health".Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
(1) Background: One out of two pregnant women has a history of herpes infection. Initial infections have a high risk of neonatal transmission. Our objective was to analyse the professional practises of midwives regarding the management of herpes infections during pregnancy in France; (2) Methods: A national survey conducted via an online self-questionnaire, including clinical vignettes for which the midwives proposed a diagnosis, a drug treatment, a mode of birth, and a prognosis. These responses were used to evaluate the conformity of the responses to the guidelines, as well as the influence of certain criteria, such as mode of practise and experience; (3) Results: Of 728 responses, only 26.1% of the midwives reported being aware of the 2017 clinical practise guidelines. The midwives proposed taking the appropriate actions in 56.1% of the responses in the case of a recurrence, and in 95.1% of the responses in the case of a primary infection. For the specific, high-risk case of a nonprimary initial infection at 38 weeks of gestation, reporting knowledge of the recommendations improved the compliance of the proposed care by 40% (
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.