ReviewInternational journal of molecular sciences2023
Molecular Testing for the Diagnosis of Bacterial Vaginosis.
Review 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 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Prevalence of Five Clinically Relevant Genital Microorganisms Among Women in South America, 2014-2024: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Pathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Pooled it
- Evaluation of the Hologic Aptima Vaginitis assays for microbiological diagnosis of vaginitis in women with abnormal vaginal discharge attending primary care.Journal of medical microbiology · 2026Article
- Regulatory Effects ofMicroorganisms · 2026Article
- Morphology-defined bacterial vaginosis and HPV-related cervical screening abnormalities: a two-year real-world study with histopathologic correlation.Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2026Article
- Natural Molecules, Nutraceuticals, and Engineered Nanosystems: A Comprehensive Strategy for CombatingMicroorganisms · 2025Review
- Healthcare utilization and costs following molecular diagnostic testing among patients with vaginitis.Journal of comparative effectiveness research · 2025Article
- Exploring vaginal microbiome: from traditional methods to metagenomic next-generation sequencing-a systematic review.Frontiers in microbiology · 2025Review
- Utilization of Syndromic Vaginitis Diagnostic Testing Reduces 6-Month Follow-Up Outpatient Service Healthcare Costs-A Real-World Data Analysis.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Vaginal microbiota transplantation is a truly opulent and promising edge: fully grasp its potential.Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Previously established diagnostic approaches for the diagnosis of bacterial vaginosis (BV), such as the Amsel criteria or the Nugent scoring system, do not always correspond to modern trends in understanding the etiology and pathogenesis of polymicrobial conditions. Inter-examiner variability and interpretation of data complicate the wet mount microscopy method. Gram staining of smears does not always provide reliable information regarding bacterial taxa, biofilms, or vaginal dysbiosis. Therefore, the introduction of molecular techniques into clinical practice is extremely relevant. Molecular approaches allow not only the diagnosis of BV but also provide an assessment of microbial composition, which is especially important in the differential diagnosis of vaginal infections. The current review represents an expert opinion on BV diagnosis and is based on extensive experience in the field of vaginal infection diagnosis and treatment.
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.