Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40908682›Full record

ArticleTurkish journal of obstetrics and gynecology2025

Routine antenatal toxoplasmosis screening, is it necessary?

Gonca Türker Ergün, Dilek Şahin

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Turkish journal of obstetrics and gynecology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

2 authors.

Gonca Türker ErgünUniversity of Health Sciences Türkiye, Ankara City Hospital, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Ankara, Türkiye.ORCID 0000-0003-1064-8727
Dilek ŞahinUniversity of Health Sciences Türkiye, Ankara City Hospital, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Ankara, Türkiye.ORCID 0000-0001-8567-9048

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objective: Toxoplasmosis is an intracellular parasite and one of the most common congenital infections. Currently, there is no clear consensus on routine screening for toxoplasma infection during pregnancy. This study aimed to discuss the results of antenatal toxoplasma screening in a tertiary center. Materials and Methods: A retrospective study including the data of the antenatal toxoplasmosis screening test results over four years. Toxoplasma immunoglobulin M (IgM), toxoplasma immunoglobulin G (IgG), anti-IgG avidity test results, amniocentesis, and toxoplasma polymerase chain reaction (PCR) were obtained from the hospital records. Patients with missing toxoplasma IgM, IgG, anti-IgG avidity, test results were excluded from the study. In addition, the fetal outcomes and follow-up information for the newborns of pregnant women who gave birth in our hospital were recorded. Results: During the study period, a total of 49,292 toxoplasma IgM tests were examined. Fifty pregnant women whose toxoplasma IgM was positive with a low-anti-toxoplasma IgG avidity index were enrolled in the study group. Forty percent of the pregnant women are expected to have amniocentesis. There was only one termination of pregnancy with specific ultrasonographic findings. Toxoplasma PCR was found to be negative in the other pregnant women. Of the pregnant women who were followed up, 23 gave birth in our hospital and the Sabin Feldman test was positive in 65.2 percent (15/23) of the newborns. Conclusion: Antenatal toxoplasmosis screening should be preserved for pregnant women with fetal ultrasonographic findings which may be related to toxoplasmosis. Further studies are needed.

Indexed as

antenatal screeningavidityfetal infectionhigh risk pregnancyToxoplasmosis

Identifiers

PMID40908682
PMCPMC12411984

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.