ArticleJournal of family medicine and primary care2025
Improving neonatal outcome by studying the incidence of maternal group B streptococcus colonization among pregnant women: A prospective observational study.
Article in Journal of family medicine and primary care, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Comparison of cytokine responses to group BInfection and immunity · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Aims and Objectives: Group B streptococcus (GBS) colonization during pregnancy can lead to invasive infections in neonates including meningitis or sepsis. The major risk factor for neonatal disease is the rectovaginal colonization of GBS during pregnancy and delivery. The objectives of this study were as follows: 1) to screen antenatal patients at 35-37 weeks of gestation for GBS colonization, 2) to determine the prevalence of GBS among pregnant women, 3) to formulate an antibiotic policy with respect to antepartum antibiotic prophylaxis and empiric choice of antibiotics for early onset neonatal sepsis, and 4) to ascertain the maternal and neonatal outcomes in pregnant women with positive GBS colonization. Material and Methods: A prospective observational study was conducted among 50 obstetric patients at 35-37 weeks of gestation attending the outpatient and inpatient departments of a tertiary care hospital. High vaginal and rectal swabs were collected and immediately transported to the microbiology lab and were sent for culture and sensitivity testing using the standard culture methods. The incidence of positive cultures was noted and was taken up as a reference for statistical calculations. Results: Out of the 50 vaginal samples, one sample showed GBS positivity having a prevalence of 2%. Rectal swabs did not grow GBS for all samples. Neither the pregnant woman nor the newborn showed any symptoms or signs due to GBS. GBS grown in vaginal culture was highly sensitive to benzyl penicillin and other penicillins, cephalosporins, clindamycin, daptomycin, vancomycin, meropenem, and linezolid. Conclusion: Based on our findings, screening the patients with routine rectovaginal swabs may not be necessary in our population. Also, empiric treatment with antibiotics for GBS in symptomatic mothers cannot be justified, and hence, GBS should be considered as an insignificant pathogen.
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.