ArticleSouthern medical journal2026
Sexually Transmitted Infection Screening and Positivity in Pregnant Women Living in Areas with High Social Vulnerability Indices.
Article in Southern medical journal, 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
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesPregnant women living in rural areas of the United States are not equitably served by healthcare systems and may be disproportionately affected by sexually transmitted infections (STIs). We examined the impact of location of pregnancy care on STI screening and positivity in a statewide health system.
methodsPregnant women seeking care within a statewide health system during 2021-2022 were categorized by location of care at either the main university hospital (urban) or regional (rural) hospitals. We assessed STI screening and positivity for chlamydia, gonorrhea, and trichomoniasis within each setting and by the Social Vulnerability Index (SVI) assigned to the person's census tract (high ≥0.75 vs low <0.75). We identified 12,921 unique pregnancy episodes: 9051 (70%) within the university hospital and 3870 (30%) in regional hospitals.
resultsThe mean census tract SVI among all women was 0.54 (standard deviation 0.29), and 29% of pregnant women resided in areas with a high SVI. Women in care at a regional hospital were more likely to reside in areas with a high SVI compared with the university hospital (41% v. 23%). In total, 75% of pregnant women were screened for any STI (9727/12,921). Compared with university hospitals, STI screening rates during pregnancy were lower (77% vs 70%) and STI positivity during pregnancy was higher in regional hospitals (chlamydia [3.9% vs 6.4%], gonorrhea [0.6% vs 1.3%], and trichomoniasis [4.6% vs 8%]).
conclusionsIn a statewide health system, pregnancy care provided in rural regional hospitals was associated with lower STI screening rates and higher STI positivity.
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.