ArticlePloS one2026
Analysis of the correlation between vaginal microbiota and high-risk human papillomavirus infection and cervical lesions.
Article in PloS one, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The aim of this study was to evaluate changes in the vaginal microbiota and biomarkers among high-risk human papillomavirus (hrHPV)-positive women, those with hrHPV accompanied by mucositis, and patients with cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) and to establish a novel predictive model. Vaginal samples from 102 women were categorized into four groups: control group (n = 26), hrHPV-positive group (n = 22), hrHPV-positive with mucositis group (n = 26), and CIN group (n = 28). Microbiota analysis was performed using the PacBio platform with full-length 16S rDNA gene sequencing. The vaginal microbiota in the hrHPV-positive, hrHPV-positive with mucositis, and CIN groups showed significant differences compared with the healthy control group. The microbial richness in the hrHPV-positive group was significantly different from both the CIN group and healthy controls. Compared with the control group, the hrHPV-positive group exhibited significantly increased relative abundances of Bifidobacterium, Escherichia-Shigella, Hoylesella and nominally increased abundances of Gardnerella, Prevotella, along with a significant decrease in Lactobacillus. No statistically significant differences were retained between the hrHPV-positive group and the hrHPV-positive with mucositis group after FDR correction for the top 10 genera. Compared with the hrHPV-positive with mucositis group, the CIN group demonstrated significantly reduced levels of Pseudomonas, nominally decreased levels of Bifidobacterium and Faecalibacterium, whereas Glutamicibacter and Sporosarcina were nominally enriched. A random forest model was constructed to predict risk across groups and demonstrated good predictive performance, suggesting that vaginal microbiota may serve as valuable indicators for predicting cervical lesion risk. During hrHPV infection, significant alterations occur in the vaginal microecology, primarily characterized by an increase in pathogenic bacteria and a reduction in beneficial bacterial populations.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.