Trial reportBMC women's health2024
Comparative efficacy of oral and vaginal probiotics in reducing the recurrence of bacterial vaginosis: a double-blind clinical trial.
Trial report in BMC women's health, 2024. 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.
- Effective probiotic regimens for bacterial vaginosis treatment and recurrence prevention: A systematic review.Narra J · 2025Pooled it
- Microbiome and aging: Trajectories of microbiome age across human ecosystems and their systemic effects.iMeta · 2026Review
- Vaginal Microbiome Profiles and Reproductive Outcomes: Implications for Natural Conception and Assisted Reproduction.Cureus · 2026Review
- Intravaginal Formulation Strategies for Vaginal Disorders: Optimizing Phytochemical and Biological Preparations-A Review.Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Vaginal Probiotic Potential of the Nomadic Species Limosilactobacacillus fermentum Under Dysbiotic Vaginal Conditions: Population Genomic Insights and Anti-Pathogenic Efficacy of a Vaginal Isolate VL9.Probiotics and antimicrobial proteins · 2026Article
- The Women's Microbiome: Molecular Insights, Clinical Gaps, and Future Frontiers in Precision Health with Implications for Gulf Cooperation Council Populations.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Review
- Precision Microbial Therapeutics for Infertility: Next-Generation Probiotics, Engineered Biologics and Translational Pathways.Microbial biotechnology · 2026Review
- Microbial regulators of physiological and reproductive health in women of reproductive age: their local, proximal and distal regulatory roles.NPJ biofilms and microbiomes · 2025Review
- Leveraging the microbiome to combat antibiotic resistant gynecological infections.npj antimicrobials and resistance · 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThe primary goal of this study is to discern the optimal adjuvant treatment for patients diagnosed with bacterial vaginosis, focusing on reducing recurrence rates.
methodsThis study is a double-blind clinical trial with no previous similar trials conducted to date. The study population consisted of non-pregnant, married women visiting teaching hospitals' clinics in Mashhad, complaining of vaginal discharge. After informed consent and questionnaire completion, samples were obtained from vaginal discharge surrounding the cervix of clinically diagnosed bacterial vaginosis patients. Using Gram staining, a gold standard method for bacterial vaginosis diagnosis, samples were examined under a microscope according to the Nugent score. After initial treatment with metronidazole, patients were divided into two groups receiving either vaginal or oral probiotics.
resultsOf the 55 participating women, 20 were in the vaginal probiotic group and 35 were in the oral probiotic group. No significant demographic or clinical differences existed between groups at baseline. The Nugent score decreased from 8.5 to 3 in the vaginal group and from 9 to 3 in the oral group, suggesting the effectiveness of both treatments. While the difference between groups was not statistically significant, each group showed significant improvements from their initial states (p-value < 0.001).
conclusionNo significant difference was observed in the effectiveness of oral versus vaginal probiotics in reducing the recurrence of bacterial vaginosis after routine treatment. Therefore, the type of probiotic to be used could be chosen based on patient preference.
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.