↓ Skip to main content

Antibiotics for asymptomatic bacteriuria in pregnancy

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, August 2015
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 (91st percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (66th percentile)

Mentioned by

1 blog
2 policy sources
8 tweeters
2 Wikipedia pages


102 Dimensions

Readers on

170 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.
Antibiotics for asymptomatic bacteriuria in pregnancy
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, August 2015
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd000490.pub3
Pubmed ID

Fiona M Smaill, Juan C Vazquez


Asymptomatic bacteriuria occurs in 2% to 10% of pregnancies and, if not treated, up to 30% of mothers will develop acute pyelonephritis. Asymptomatic bacteriuria has been associated with low birthweight and preterm birth. To assess the effect of antibiotic treatment for asymptomatic bacteriuria on the development of pyelonephritis and the risk of low birthweight and preterm birth. We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (19 March 2015) and reference lists of retrieved studies. Randomized trials comparing antibiotic treatment with placebo or no treatment in pregnant women with asymptomatic bacteriuria found on antenatal screening. Two review authors independently assessed trials for inclusion and risk of bias, extracted data and checked them for accuracy. Fourteen studies, involving almost 2000 women, were included. Antibiotic treatment compared with placebo or no treatment reduced the incidence of pyelonephritis (average risk ratio (RR) 0.23, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.13 to 0.41; 11 studies, 1932 women; very low quality evidence). Antibiotic treatment was also associated with a reduction in the incidence of low birthweight babies (average RR 0.64, 95% CI 0.45 to 0.93; six studies, 1437 babies; low quality evidence) and preterm birth (RR 0.27, 95% CI 0.11 to 0.62; two studies, 242 women; low quality evidence). A reduction in persistent bacteriuria at the time of delivery was seen (average RR 0.30, 95% CI 0.18 to 0.53; four studies; 596 women). There were very limited data on which to estimate the effect of antibiotics on other infant outcomes and maternal adverse effects were rarely described.Overall, all 14 studies were assessed as being at high or unclear risk of bias. While many studies lacked an adequate description of methods and the risk of bias could only be assessed as unclear, in almost all studies there was at least one domain where the risk of bias was judged as high. The three primary outcomes were assessed with GRADE software and given a quality rating. Evidence for pyelonephritis, preterm birth and birthweight less than 2500 g was assessed as of low or very low quality. While antibiotic treatment is effective in reducing the risk of pyelonephritis in pregnancy, the estimate of the effect is very uncertain because of the very low quality of the evidence. The reduction in low birthweight and preterm birth with antibiotic treatment is consistent with theories about the role of infection in adverse pregnancy outcomes, but this association should be interpreted with caution given the very poor quality of the included studies.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 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 170 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Portugal 1 <1%
Unknown 169 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 28 16%
Student > Bachelor 27 16%
Other 21 12%
Researcher 17 10%
Student > Postgraduate 15 9%
Other 32 19%
Unknown 30 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 82 48%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 11 6%
Nursing and Health Professions 10 6%
Immunology and Microbiology 8 5%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 7 4%
Other 17 10%
Unknown 35 21%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 22. 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 14 April 2020.
All research outputs
of 15,579,440 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
of 11,221 outputs
Outputs of similar age
of 250,817 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
of 264 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 15,579,440 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 94th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,221 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 23.2. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% 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 250,817 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 264 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 66% of its contemporaries.