MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Antibiotics for Bacterial Vaginosis or Trichomonas vaginalis in Pregnancy: A Systematic Review

2005· review· en· W1975286658 on OpenAlexaff
Nanette Okun, Karen A. Gronau, Mary E. Hannah

Bibliographic record

VenueObstetrics and Gynecology · 2005
Typereview
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicReproductive tract infections research
Canadian institutionsCoalition for Research in Women's HealthUniversity of TorontoWomen's College HospitalHealth Sciences CentreMount Sinai HospitalSunnybrook Health Science Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBacterial vaginosisMedicineTrichomonas vaginalisMetronidazoleObstetricsPregnancyTrichomonasVaginitisPopulationTrichomoniasisRandomized controlled trialGynecologyAntibioticsInternal medicineMicrobiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether antibiotic treatment for bacterial vaginosis or Trichomonas vaginalis during pregnancy decreases the risk of preterm birth and associated adverse outcomes. DATA SOURCES: Pre-MEDLINE and MEDLINE (1966-2003), EMBASE (1980-2003), and the Cochrane Library were searched using the keywords "bacterial vaginosis", "Trichomonas", "Trichomonas vaginalis", "Trichomonas vaginitis", "Trichomonas infections", "pregnancy", "pregnant", "antibiotics", and "antibiotic prophylaxis". METHODS OF STUDY SELECTION: The search produced 1,888 titles, of which 1,256 abstracts were reviewed further. Of these, 1,217 were ineligible. Inclusion criteria were the following: randomized controlled trials in which antibiotics were compared with no antibiotic or placebo, for women in the second or third trimester of pregnancy with symptomatic or asymptomatic bacterial vaginosis or Trichomonas vaginalis, intact membranes, and not in labor. Exclusion criteria were as follows: published in a language other than English, dropout rate of more than 20% of women in either group, and lack of usable outcomes. Of the 39 papers reviewed in detail, 14 studies were included in the meta-analysis. TABULATION, INTEGRATION, AND RESULTS: One of the authors reviewed titles obtained from the searches, and 2 reviewers independently reviewed the abstracts, excluded those that were ineligible, identified eligible papers, and abstracted the data. For women with bacterial vaginosis, antibiotics reduced the risk of persistent infection but did not reduce the risk of preterm birth or the incidence of associated adverse outcomes for the general population or for any subgroup analyzed. For women with Trichomonas vaginalis, metronidazole reduced the risk of persistent infection but increased the incidence of preterm birth. CONCLUSION: Contrary to the conclusions of 3 recent systematic reviews, we found no evidence to support the use of antibiotic treatment for bacterial vaginosis or Trichomonas vaginalis in pregnancy to reduce the risk of preterm birth or its associated morbidities in low- or high-risk women.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.031
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.040

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.031
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0110.008
Bibliometrics0.0070.008
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.070
GPT teacher head0.370
Teacher spread0.301 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations161
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueObstetrics and GynecologySame topicReproductive tract infections researchFrench-language works237,207