↓ Skip to main content

Antibiotic treatment for the sexual partners of women with bacterial vaginosis

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, October 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (85th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (58th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
14 tweeters
facebook
2 Facebook pages
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
14 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
4 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Antibiotic treatment for the sexual partners of women with bacterial vaginosis
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, October 2016
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd011701.pub2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jairo Amaya-Guio, David Andres Viveros-Carreño, Eloisa Mercedes Sierra-Barrios, Mercy Yolima Martinez-Velasquez, Carlos F Grillo-Ardila

Abstract

Bacterial vaginosis (BV) is an infection that has a prevalence between 10% to 50% worlwide. BV results in an imbalance of the normal vaginal flora. Microorganisms associated with BV have been isolated from the normal flora of the male genital tract, and their presence could be related to the recurrence of BV after antibiotic treatment. Therefore, the treatment of sexual partners could decrease the recurrence of infection and possibly the burden of the disease. To assess the effectiveness in women and the safety in men of concurrent antibiotic treatment for the sexual partners of women treated for BV. We searched the Cochrane Sexually Transmitted Infections Group Specialized Register (23 July 2016), CENTRAL (1991 to 23 July 2016), MEDLINE (1946 to 23 July 2016), Embase (1974 to 23 July 2016), LILACS (1982 to 23 July 2016), the World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) (23 July 2016), ClinicalTrials.gov (23 July 2016) and the Web of Science™ (2001 to 23 July 2016). We also handsearched conference proceedings, contacted trial authors and reviewed the reference lists of retrieved studies. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared the concurrent use of any antibiotic treatment with placebo, no intervention or any other intervention by the sexual partners of women treated for BV. Three review authors independently assessed trials for inclusion, extracted data and assessed the risk of bias in the included studies. We resolved any disagreements through consensus. We assessed the quality of the evidence using the GRADE approach. Seven RCTs (1026 participants) met our inclusion criteria, and pharmaceutical industry funded four of these trials. Five trials (854 patients) compared any antibiotic treatment of sexual partners with placebo. Based on high quality evidence, antibiotic treatment does not increase the rate of clinical or symptomatic improvement in women during the first week (risk ratio (RR) 0.99, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.96 to 1.03; 712 participants, four studies; RR 1.06, 95% CI 1.00 to 1.12; 577 patients, three studies, respectively), between the first and fourth week (RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.94 to 1.11; 590 participants, three studies; RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.84 to 1.03; 444 participants, two studies; respectively) or after the fourth week (RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.90 to 1.07; 572 participants, four studies; RR 1.03, 95% CI 0.90 to 1.17; 296 participants, two studies; respectively). Antibiotic treatment does not led to a lower recurrence during the first and fourth week (RR 1.28, 95% CI 0.68 to 2.43; 218 participants, one study; low quality evidence) or after the fourth week of treatment (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.67 to 1.52; 372 participants, three studies; low quality evidence) in women, but increases the frequency of adverse events (most frequently gastrointestinal symptoms) reported by sexual partners (RR 2.55, 95% CI 1.55 to 4.18; 477 participants, three studies; low quality evidence). Two trials (172 participants) compared any antibiotic treatment for sexual partners with no intervention. When we compared it with no intervention, the effects of antibiotic treatment on recurrence rate after the fourth week (RR 1.71, 95% CI 0.65 to 4.55; 51 participants, one study), clinical improvement between the first and fourth week (RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.70 to 1.25; 152 participants, two studies) and symptomatic improvement after the fourth week (RR 0.66, 95% CI 0.39 to 1.11; 70 participants, one study) were imprecise and there were no differences between groups. We downgraded the quality of the evidence to low or very low. High quality evidence shows that antibiotic treatment for sexual partners of women with BV, compared with placebo, does not increase the rate of clinical or symptomatic improvement during the first, between the first and fourth or after the fourth week into the women. Low quality evidence suggests that antibiotic treatment does not led to a lower recurrence rate during the first and fourth or after the fourth week of treatment into the women, but increases the frequency of adverse events reported by sexual partners. Finally, compared with no intervention, antibiotic treatment does not decrease the recurrence rate after the fourth week and does not increase the frequency of clinical or symptomatic improvement between the first and fourth or after the fourth week into the women, respectively.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 14 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 4 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 1 25%
Unknown 3 75%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 15 375%
Student > Master 13 325%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 225%
Researcher 6 150%
Other 6 150%
Other 14 350%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 29 725%
Nursing and Health Professions 10 250%
Social Sciences 4 100%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 100%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 3 75%
Other 10 250%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 12. 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 17 January 2019.
All research outputs
#1,277,479
of 13,232,126 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#3,770
of 10,531 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#37,883
of 266,501 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#80
of 193 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 13,232,126 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 90th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 10,531 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 20.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 64% 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 266,501 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 85% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 193 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 58% of its contemporaries.