ArticleParasitology2025
An investigation of female genital schistosomiasis and associated genital infections in Southern Malawi.
Article in Parasitology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Prevalence and associated risk factors of self-reported symptoms suggestive of female genital schistosomiasis (FGS) among women in KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa.PLoS neglected tropical diseases · 2026Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
32 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Urogenital schistosomiasis (UGS) caused by zoonotic or hybrid schistosome infection(s) is an emerging public health concern in Malawi, and we describe a 1-year clinical sub-study with 3 inspection time points for female genital schistosomiasis (FGS) upon selecting 86 women with proven UGS. This sub-study was set within a broader 2-year longitudinal 'Hybridization in UroGenital Schistosomiasis (HUGS)' investigation. A detailed cervicovaginal examination with a portable colposcope was conducted, examining cervicovaginal lavage (CVL), cervical swab, cervical biopsy and urine with traditional parasitological and molecular diagnostic methods. At baseline, overt FGS by colposcopy was 72.1%, 64.3% by CVL real-time PCR and 51.2% by both colposcopy and CVL-PCR, noting urine-microscopy could often be negative. Human papillomavirus was detected in 31.0% of the cervical swabs, with 8.3% women also FGS positive by colposcopy and real-time PCR. Over the year, FGS prevalence by colposcopy increased by 32.7% during the study to 84.6%, homogenous yellow and grainy sandy patches being very common in the youngest 18-25 age group, where 51.9% were positive. FGS appears widespread locally and we discuss difficulties in its detection without invasive sampling. In addition to the presence of
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.