ArticleSexually transmitted infections2025
Comprehensive assessment of vaginal infections using a single swab.
Article in Sexually transmitted infections, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Clinical utility of nucleic acid amplification testing for detection of sexually transmitted infections in women with symptomatic bacterial vaginosis and vulvovaginal candidiasis identified by conventional versus molecular diagnoses.Journal of clinical microbiology · 2026Article
- Vaginitis and Sexually Transmitted Infections Coinfections.O&G open · 2026Article
- Prevalence ofTropical medicine and infectious disease · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe decision to use a particular test to diagnose patients presenting with symptoms of vaginitis and/or STI is based primarily on the prevailing standards of care in the clinic at which the patient evaluation takes place. As a result, laboratory testing of vaginal samples for these patients often involves either an STI or a vaginitis test, but rarely both options simultaneously, which complicates the diagnosis and management of concurrent infections.
methodsUsing de-identified remnant vaginal specimens from symptomatic patients previously tested for STI (
findingsThe rate of STI/BV co-infection was 79.4% (227/286) in this symptomatic population, while that of STI/VVC was 27.0% (77/285). Women diagnosed with any one of the three STIs tested had an OR 2.86 (95% CI, 1.99, 4.11; p<0.0001) for a concurrent BV infection and OR 0.96 (95% CI, 0.67, 1.37; p=0.8085) for infection with
conclusionOur results suggest that women being tested for STI have a high prevalence of co-infection with BV and a lower, although appreciable, prevalence of co-infection with VVC. The detection of co-occurring vaginal infections can be facilitated by molecular testing using a single sample.
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.