Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37762424›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of molecular sciences2023

Menstrual Tampons Are Reliable and Acceptable Tools to Self-Collect Vaginal Microbiome Samples.

Florence Turner, Josephine Drury, Dharani K Hapangama, Nicola Tempest

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of molecular sciences, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
1.1field-weighted citation impact, top 24% 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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
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

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Florence TurnerCentre for Women's Health Research, Department of Women's and Children's Health, Institute of Life Course and Medical Sciences, University of Liverpool, Member of Liverpool Health Partners, Liverpool L8 7SS, UK.
Josephine DruryCentre for Women's Health Research, Department of Women's and Children's Health, Institute of Life Course and Medical Sciences, University of Liverpool, Member of Liverpool Health Partners, Liverpool L8 7SS, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-2275-6664
Dharani K HapangamaCentre for Women's Health Research, Department of Women's and Children's Health, Institute of Life Course and Medical Sciences, University of Liverpool, Member of Liverpool Health Partners, Liverpool L8 7SS, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-0270-0150
Nicola TempestCentre for Women's Health Research, Department of Women's and Children's Health, Institute of Life Course and Medical Sciences, University of Liverpool, Member of Liverpool Health Partners, Liverpool L8 7SS, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-3633-1592
University of Liverpool · GB

Funding

Wellbeing of Women RG1073Wellbeing of Women RG2137Wellbeing of Women RTF510
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Many women report embarrassment as the cause for their avoidance of routine gynaecological screening appointments. Methods of self-collection of bio samples would perhaps encourage women to participate in routine screening programs. The vaginal microbiome plays a key role in women's health and reproductive function. Microbial disturbances can result in the loss of lactobacillus dominance, also known as dysbiosis, associated with an increased risk of contracting sexually transmitted infections (STIs), pregnancy complications and infertility. Our primary aim was to determine if vaginal microbiome screening results are comparable between two methods for self-collected sample acquisition: tampons and lower vaginal swabs (LVSs). Secondary aims included the assessment of the effect of pre-analytic storage on the data (to streamline processing), the prevalence of dysbiosis and the acceptability of the tampons to the participants. Statistical analysis revealed no significant difference in the microbiome data, from tampons versus LVSs or fresh versus frozen samples. The prevalence of dysbiosis in this population of healthy volunteers was 42.9%. The questionnaire data revealed that 52.4% of volunteers use tampons every period, and the majority of volunteers rated the tampons as 5 on a 1-5 Likert scale regarding their perceived comfort using tampons. All (100%) of volunteers were happy to provide a tampon as a sample for testing. The findings from this study show that tampons and LVSs were comparable when analysing the vaginal microbiome, with potential superiority of the tampon with regard to patient acceptability. Self-collection of vaginal secretions for gynaecological screening using tampons warrants further research as this could change the screening landscape, ensuring wider participation and increasing efficacy.

Indexed as

Menstrual Hygiene ProductsSexually Transmitted DiseasesDysbiosisFemaleHumansPregnancyVaginaWomen's Healthtamponvaginal microbiomevaginal swab

Identifiers

PMID37762424
PMCPMC10531428
OpenAlexW4386784242

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.