CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 154Reproductive tract infections researchAntifungal resistance and susceptibilityUrinary Tract Infections Management

Risk Factors for Vulvovaginal Candidiasis: A Case- Control Study among University Students

Geiger, Ann M., Foxman, Betsy·1996·Epidemiology
DOI 10.1097/00001648-199603000-00013
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Vulvovaginal candidiasis (VVC) is a common inflammatory condition caused by vaginal overgrowth of Candida albicans. Typical symptoms include pruritus and discharge. To test the association between several hypothesized risk factors and VVC, we conducted a case-control study among university students, with both clinic and population controls. Symptomatic, culture-proven VVC was associated with receptive oral sex twice or more in the previous 2 weeks [vs not at all, odds ratio (OR) = 3.5; 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.7-7.0]; oral contraceptive use (OR = 1.8; 95% CI = 0.95-3.6); spermicide use (OR = 3.3; 95% CI = 1.6-6.8); a prior diagnosis of VVC in the previous year (OR = 3.0; 95% CI = 1.5-5.9); and black (OR = 6.8; 95% CI = 3.1-15) and "other" race (OR = 2.2; 95% CI = 1.0-4.6). Estimates are from a cases vs population controls logistic regression model including all five variables; results for cases vs clinic controls were similar. After adjusting for these factors, many other hypothesized risk factors, such as antibiotic use, menstrual hygiene practices, and vaginal intercourse, had little association with VVC.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1097/00001648-199603000-00013

Cites

22 of 22 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

  • Black or African American women had a 7-fold higher risk of having vulvovaginal candidiasis than other racial groups among university students in one study.

    “Black or African American women also had a 7-fold higher risk of having vulvovaginal candidiasis (VVC) than other racial groups among university students [116], in 1 study.”

    From Race and ethnicity: Risk factors for fungal infections? (2023) · cites this paper as [116]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Geiger, A. M., & Foxman, B.
Affiliations
University of Michigan (US)
ORCID
Venue
Epidemiology
Publisher
Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)
Published
1996-03
Volume
7
Issue
2
Pages
182-187
ISSN
1044-3983 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1097/00001648-199603000-00013
OpenAlex
W1970326156
Cited by
154
References
22
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 7 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 7 · 2013: 5 · 2012: 7
FWCI
3.31
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Epidemiology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health (2r01dk035368-08a1)
  • National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (R01 DK35368)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Immunology and Microbiology › Microbiology › Reproductive tract infections research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Infectious Diseases › Antifungal resistance and susceptibility
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Urinary Tract Infections Management
Keywords
vaginal candidiasis, risk factors, Candida albicans, oral contraceptive use, recurrent candidiasis, race, university students
MeSH terms
Adult, Candidiasis, Vulvovaginal, Clothing, Contraception Behavior, Cross-Sectional Studies, Female, Humans, Hygiene, Michigan, Risk, Sexual Behavior, Students, Incidence, Case-Control Studies

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