ArticleBMC infectious diseases2026
Prevalence, seasonal patterns, and microbial co-occurrence of selected genital tract microorganisms in women attending a gynecological counseling service in Southern Italy.
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
14 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundSexually transmitted infections (STIs) represent a major global public health problem due to their potential to cause serious complications such as infertility, chronic pelvic pain, and increased susceptibility to HIV. Young adults, and especially women of reproductive age, are particularly vulnerable, underscoring the need for early diagnosis, routine screening, and targeted prevention efforts. However, not all genital tract infections are sexually transmitted, and distinguishing between STIs and non-sexually transmitted genital tract pathogens is essential for accurate epidemiological interpretation and clinical management.
methodsWe conducted a cross-sectional study among women aged 18-60 years attending a gynaecological counseling service in Southern Italy. Endocervical and vaginal swabs were tested for a panel of pathogens, including classical STI agents (e.g., Chlamydia trachomatis, Neisseria gonorrhoeae) and non-sexually transmitted or opportunistic genital tract microorganisms. Multivariable Poisson regression, seasonal trends, and pairwise co-occurrence models were employed to investigate correlations of microorganism detection.
resultsA total of 536 women were tested. Classical STI pathogens were rarely or not detected, with Chlamydia trachomatis and Neisseria gonorrhoeae showing very low prevalence. In contrast, non-STI genital tract pathogens were frequently identified, with Gardnerella vaginalis being the most prevalent, followed by Enterococcus faecalis and Staphylococcus aureus. Seasonal patterns were observed primarily among S. aureus and Pseudomonas spp. showing lower positivity rates in spring and summer compared to autumn and winter. Co-detection analysis revealed non-random associations mainly involving non-STI organisms, particularly between E. faecalis and Escherichia coli, and between G. vaginalis and Proteus spp. or Staphylococcus spp.
conclusionsIn this population, classical STIs were infrequent, whereas non-sexually transmitted genital tract pathogens were more commonly detected and showed distinct epidemiological patterns. These findings highlight the importance of clearly distinguishing between STIs and other genital tract infections in both research and clinical practice, while maintaining targeted prevention and screening strategies for STIs.
trial registrationTerritorial Ethics Committee of the Calabria Region (Protocol No. 168, dated May 30, 2024). CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER: Not applicable.
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.