ArticleBMC infectious diseases2026
Diagnostic accuracy of an enzyme-based point-of-care test versus Nugent score for bacterial vaginosis among pregnant women attending routine antenatal care in Zambia.
Article in BMC infectious diseases, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
backgroundBacterial vaginosis (BV) is associated with adverse pregnancy outcomes. OSOM® BVBlue® is a chromogenic point-of-care (POC) test that detects sialidase, an enzyme produced by Gardnerella vaginalis and some other anaerobic bacteria associated with BV. This study, part of the World Health Organization’s global ProSPeRo study, aimed to evaluate the performance of this POC test compared with the Nugent score reference standard among pregnant women in Zambia. Additionally, the operational characteristics and patient acceptability of the POC test were evaluated.
methodsPregnant women attending four health centres in Nchelenge, Zambia, for antenatal care between 15 February and 26 May 2023 participated. Clinician-collected vaginal swabs for OSOM® BVBlue® and Nugent scoring were obtained from each participant. POC test results were read independently by two staff members. Study staff completed a questionnaire on the operational characteristics of the POC test, whereas participants were asked about the length of time that they would be willing to wait for POC test results.
resultsPaired POC and reference test vaginal swabs from 999 participants were analysed. Overall, 23.1% (231/999) tested positive for BV by Nugent score. Overall sensitivity and specificity of OSOM® BVBlue® were 41.3% (95% confidence interval [CI] 25.4–59.2%) and 93.1% (95% CI 89.8–95.4%), respectively. Inter-rater agreement was 99.6% (Cohen’s Kappa 0.984). Most pregnant women, 97.9% (978/999), were willing to wait up to 20 min for a POC test result, and 59.2% (591/999) up to 30 min. Of 14 study staff members, all found the POC test easy to use and instructions clear, 13 felt the results were easy to interpret, with 12 reporting test results were available within 25 min. Cold-chain requirements and short shelf life were perceived as significant challenges.
conclusionOverall, OSOM® BVBlue® yielded sub-optimal sensitivity. The findings from this study are valuable for the development of minimal and optimal product profiles for POC tests for BV. These profiles, in turn, may guide future research and development for this prevalent condition with important sexual and reproductive health consequences. Logistical challenges need to be addressed for effective implementation of POC testing in resource-limited settings.
trial registrationPACTR202302766902029.
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.