Cited by 73Reproductive tract infections researchPreterm Birth and ChorioamnionitisUrinary Tract Infections Management

Screening for Bacterial Vaginosis in Pregnant Persons to Prevent Preterm Delivery: US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement

Open access
US Preventive Services Task Force, Owens, Douglas K., Davidson, Karina W., Krist, Alex H., Barry, Michael J., Cabana, Michael, Caughey, Aaron B., Donahue, Katrina +9 more·2020·JAMA

Abstract

Importance: Bacterial vaginosis is common and is caused by a disruption of the microbiological environment in the lower genital tract. In the US, reported prevalence of bacterial vaginosis among pregnant women ranges from 5.8% to 19.3% and is higher in some races/ethnicities. Bacterial vaginosis during pregnancy has been associated with adverse obstetrical outcomes including preterm delivery, early miscarriage, postpartum endometritis, and low birth weight. Objective: To update its 2008 recommendation, the USPSTF commissioned a review of the evidence on the accuracy of screening and the benefits and harms of screening for and treatment of bacterial vaginosis in asymptomatic pregnant persons to prevent preterm delivery. Population: This recommendation applies to pregnant persons without symptoms of bacterial vaginosis. Evidence Assessment: The USPSTF concludes with moderate certainty that screening for asymptomatic bacterial vaginosis in pregnant persons not at increased risk for preterm delivery has no net benefit in preventing preterm delivery. The USPSTF concludes that for pregnant persons at increased risk for preterm delivery, the evidence is conflicting and insufficient, and the balance of benefits and harms cannot be determined. Conclusions and Recommendation: The USPSTF recommends against screening for bacterial vaginosis in pregnant persons not at increased risk for preterm delivery. (D recommendation) The USPSTF concludes that the current evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of screening for bacterial vaginosis in pregnant persons at increased risk for preterm delivery. (I statement).

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1001/jama.2020.2684

Cites

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Evidence does not support routine screening for BV among asymptomatic pregnant women at high risk for preterm delivery.

    “Evidence does not support routine screening for BV among asymptomatic pregnant women at high risk for preterm delivery (159).”

    From Sexually Transmitted Infections Treatment Guidelines, 2021 (2021) · cites this paper as [159]

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 59 · Cited by 73

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Kahwati LC, Clark R, Berkman ND, et al Screening for Bacterial Vaginosis in Pregnant Adolescents and Women to Prevent Preterm Delivery: An Updated Systematic Review for the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force: Evidence Synthesis No. 190. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality; 2019. AHRQ publication 19-05259-EF-1.

Authors
US Preventive Services Task Force, Owens, D. K., Davidson, K. W., Krist, A. H., Barry, M. J., Cabana, M., Caughey, A. B., Donahue, K., Doubeni, C. A., Epling, J. W., Kubik, M., Ogedegbe, G., Pbert, L., Silverstein, M., Simon, M. A., Tseng, C.-W., & Wong, J. B.
Affiliations
  • VA Palo Alto Health Care System (US)
  • Northwell Health (US)
  • Harvard University (US)
  • Oregon Health & Science University (US)
  • University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (US)
  • Mayo Clinic (US)
  • Carilion Clinic (US)
  • New York University (US)
  • University of Massachusetts Chan Medical School (US)
  • Boston University (US)
  • Northwestern University (US)
  • University of Hawaiʻi at Mānoa (US)
  • Tufts University (US)
Corresponding author
Owens, Douglas K.
Venue
JAMA
Published
2020-04-07
Volume
323
Issue
13
Pages
1286
ISSN
  • 0002-9955 (ISSN-L)
  • 0098-7484
OpenAlex
W3014493573
Cited by
73
References
59
Citations by year
2026: 7 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 14 · 2023: 14 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 17 · 2020: 5
FWCI
7.92
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • JAMA (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • eScholarship@UMassChan (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Immunology and Microbiology › Microbiology › Reproductive tract infections research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Preterm Birth and Chorioamnionitis
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Urinary Tract Infections Management
Keywords
bacterial vaginosis, pregnancy, preterm birth, screening, asymptomatic infection, low birth weight, postpartum endometritis, miscarriage, screening accuracy, benefits and harms, USPSTF recommendations
MeSH terms
Anti-Bacterial Agents, Female, Humans, Mass Screening, Pregnancy, Pregnancy Complications, Infectious, Risk Factors, Vaginosis, Bacterial, Premature Birth, Asymptomatic Infections

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review