ArticleMedicine2026
Exploring the relationship between threatened abortion and vaginal microbiota: A retrospective study.
Article in Medicine, 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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Threatened abortion is a common complication in pregnancy. Studies have indicated an association between reproductive tract infections, vaginal microbiota imbalance, and adverse pregnancy outcomes, but evidence linking routine clinical vaginal microecological parameters to miscarriage risk remains insufficient. This retrospective study aims to systematically compare routine microecological indicators and specific pathogen infections between pregnant women at risk of miscarriage and a healthy pregnancy control group. A retrospective analysis was conducted among 136 patients with threatened abortion (threatened abortion group) and 69 healthy pregnant women (control group) who underwent prenatal examination at Shandong Maternal and Child Health Care Hospital between January 2024 and July 2025. We compared the vaginal microecological indicators between the 2 groups, including microbial density, diversity, hydrogen peroxide (H2O2), sialidase, leukocyte esterase, pH value, Nugent score, aerobic vaginitis (AV) score, as well as the presence of pathogenic microorganisms such as Ureaplasma urealyticum (UU), Candida spp., Gardnerella vaginalis/Prevotella spp., and Trichomonas vaginalis. The results showed no significant differences in microbial density, diversity, H2O2, sialidase, leukocyte esterase, pH, Nugent score, AV score, or detection rates of bacterial vaginosis, vulvovaginal candidiasis, AV or Trichomonas vaginitis between the 2 groups (all P > .05). However, the UU infection was significantly more prevalent in the threatened abortion group than in the control group (53.7% vs 24.6%, P < .001). After adjusting for maternal age and gestational age, UU infection was significantly associated with threatened abortion (adjusted odds ratio = 3.50, 95% confidence interval: 1.82-6.71, P < .001). UU infection was significantly more prevalent with threatened abortion. Whereas conventional vaginal microecological indicators were not significantly associated with threatened abortion, the limitations of this study primarily lie in the insufficient control for potential confounding factors and the constraints inherent in the laboratory methodologies employed. Future prospective studies employing more comprehensive detection techniques are needed to validate these findings.
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.