ArticleJournal of health, population, and nutrition2025
Analysis of TORCH screening and prenatal risk assessment for childbearing-age women in different regions of China.
Article in Journal of health, population, and nutrition, 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.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
17 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveBy conducting TORCH screening and risk assessment analysis on childbearing-age women in different regions of China, the aim is to provide reference for reducing adverse pregnancy outcomes and improving the health status of childbearing-age women.
methodsBetween February and May 2021, in the eastern, central, and western regions of China (Beijing, Henan, Gansu), a total of 1,942 couples aged 18 to 49, from both urban and rural areas, were included in this cross-sectional study. TORCH screening was conducted on all these women of childbearing-age, and risk assessment was performed based on the examination results.
resultIn this study, toxoplasmosis, rubella, CMV, HSV, IgM positive rate were 0.2%, 0.4%, 0.3%, 0.3%, respectively, and CT, TP, HBsAg, HCV, HIV, positive rate were 0.1%, 0.2%, 2.1%, 0.3%, 0.0%, respectively. The total TORCH screening identified 63.4% of women as having potential risks, compared to 15.5% of routine ToRCH screening. The distribution of the risk population shows significant differences among provinces, ethnicities, education levels, and age groups (p ≤ 0.001). Trend chi-square tests revealed that as the level of education increased, the proportion of the risk population decreased.
conclusionsThe TORCH screening utilized in this study demonstrates advantages over ToRCH, as it can identify more women of childbearing age with potential risks before pregnancy, allowing for early interventions. Simultaneously, these findings underscore the necessity for targeted health education, especially for young women in economically underdeveloped areas and those with relatively lower education levels.
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.