Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40206963›Full record

ArticleGynecologic oncology reports2024

Prevalence and genotype distribution of high-risk

Ho Minh Nguyet, Phan Thanh Tam, Quach Kim Ung, To Gia Kien, Le Hong Phuoc

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Gynecologic oncology reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Ho Minh NguyetDepartment of Nutrition and Non-Communicable Disease, Ho Chi Minh City Center for Disease Control, Ho Chi Minh City, Viet Nam.
Phan Thanh TamDistrict 10 Health Center, Ho Chi Minh City, Viet Nam.
Quach Kim UngBinh Thanh District Health Center, Ho Chi Minh City, Viet Nam.
To Gia KienFaculty of Public Health, University of Medicine and Pharmacy at Ho Chi Minh City, Ho Chi Minh City, Viet Nam.
Le Hong PhuocFaculty of Public Health, University of Medicine and Pharmacy at Ho Chi Minh City, Ho Chi Minh City, Viet Nam.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: Persistent infection with high-risk Methods: A population-based cross-sectional study was conducted between June 2020 and September 2020 in all 24 districts of HCMC, Viet Nam. Socio-demographic and behavioral data were collected from 2478 women aged 25 to 65 who had sexual intercourse using a self-administered questionnaire. Vaginal swab specimens from all participants were collected to identify HR-HPV genotypes using Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR) protocols. Results: The prevalence of HR-HPV infection was 3.5 % (87 women, including 20 cases infected with multi-genotypes), 3.1 % in urban and 0.4 % in rural areas. The most detected HR-HPV genotypes among positive cases were 58 (25.3 %), 52 (21.8 %), 16 (21.8 %), 68 (10.3 %), 51 (10.34 %) and 18 (9.2 %). The prevalence of multi-type HR-HPV genotypes was 0.81 %, of which the most common co-infection genotypes were 52 and 58 (20.0 %), 16 and 56 (10.0 %), and 16 and 39 (10.0 %). The percentages of one-, two-, three-, and four-genotypes of HPV among positive cases were 77.0 %, 16.1 %, 4.6 % and 2.3 %, respectively. Conclusions: Our findings explore a low prevalence of HR-HPV infection in Vietnamese women, of which genotypes 52 and 58 are more popular than 16 and 18. Continuously updated data on the genotype distribution of HPV are helpful for vaccine development and planning preventive activities to prevent HPV-related cancers.

Indexed as

High-risk HPV infectionHPV genotypeHuman PapilomavirusViet Nam

Identifiers

PMID40206963
PMCPMC11980624

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.