Data on the epidemiology of reproductive-organ morbidity are needed to guide effective interventions, to set health-care priorities, and to target future research. This study aimed to find out the prevalence of reproductive-organ disease in a sample of rural Gambian women.
A questionnaire on reproductive health was administered by fieldworkers to women aged 15-54 years living in a rural area under demographic surveillance. A female gynaecologist questioned and examined the women (including speculum and bimanual pelvic examinations). Vaginal swabs were taken to test for Trichomonas vaginalis, Candida albicans, and bacterial vaginosis, cervical smears for cytology, cervical swabs for Chlamydia trachomatis PCR and Neisseria gonorrhoeae culture, and venous blood for haemoglobin, HIV, herpes simplex virus 2, and syphilis serology.
1348 (72.0%) of 1871 eligible women took part. Reproductive-organ symptoms were more likely to be reported to the gynaecologist (52.7% of women) than to the fieldworker (26.5%). Menstrual problems, abnormal vaginal discharge, and vaginal itching were the most commonly reported symptoms. A minority of women said they had sought health care for their symptoms. The frequencies of reproductive-organ morbidity were high: menstrual dysfunction 34.1% (95% CI 29.6-39.1), infertility 9.8% (8.2-11.6), reproductive-tract infections 47.3% (43.7-51.0), pelvic tenderness 9.8% ((7.0-13.5), cervical dysplasia 6.7% (5.2-8.4), masses 15.9% (12.5-20.1), and childbirth-related damage to pelvic structures 46.1% (40.1-52.3). 948 (70.3%) women had at least one reproductive-organ disorder.
For these rural women, whose lives depend heavily on their reproductive function, reproductive-organ disease is a large burden. In inadequately resourced rural areas, with poor education, heavy agricultural and domestic labour, and limited access to quality health care, many women are not able to attain and maintain reproductive health and wellbeing.
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 03 April 2023.
All research outputs
#4,215,798
of 27,781,301 outputs
Outputs from The Lancet
#19,429
of 46,343 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#5,170
of 48,733 outputs
Outputs of similar age from The Lancet
#69
of 198 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 27,781,301 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 83rd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 46,343 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 66.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 55% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 48,733 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 198 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 60% of its contemporaries.
