ArticleJournal of multidisciplinary healthcare2023
Antenatal Screening for Toxoplasmosis and Rubella in Saudi Arabia: Assessing the Need for Screening.
Article in Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: Antenatal screening programs are highly recommended to limit maternal and neonatal infections such as toxoplasmosis and rubella. This study aimed to assess the seroprevalence of maternal toxoplasma and rubella among pregnant women tested during antenatal screening at the King Abdulaziz University Hospital, Saudi Arabia. Methods: This descriptive cross-sectional study targeted pregnant women attending the King Abdulaziz University Hospital, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, during the period of 2019-2022 for antenatal follow-up. This study included 3653 pregnant women who attended an antenatal screening. The clinical consequences of pregnancy were evaluated and categorized into six main categories based on the related complications and comorbidities of the pregnant women. The data were analyzed using the SPSS program as a descriptive statistic, and an ANOVA was used to test the associations. Results: The study findings showed that 12% of women were seropositive for toxoplasmosis and 71.4% were seropositive for rubella, and it found that almost all women (except two) were seronegative for Toxo IgM (immunoglobulin M) and rubella IgM, which indicates the absence of recent infections during the pregnancy. Approximately 19% and 4% of women who had no comorbidities experienced complicated pregnancies and delivery, respectively. Moreover, 1.3% of the pregnant women had comorbidities, complicated pregnancies, and problems during delivery. The mean Toxo IgG level was significantly higher in women with normal pregnancies than in those with other pregnancies. Rubella immunoglobulin levels did not significantly correlate with pregnancy or delivery problems. Conclusion: The seropositivity prevalence of toxoplasma Ig M and rubella Ig M were very low at the King Abdulaziz University Hospital, Saudi Arabia, indicating absence of current infections. However, the benefits of routine antenatal screening in pregnant women remain unclear. This study was conducted at one hospital, with a limited sample of participants, and did not yield adequate evidence to recommend a broader implementation of antenatal testing for toxoplasmosis and rubella.
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.