Magnitude of syphilis sero-status and associated factors among pregnant women attending antenatal care in Jinka town public health facilities, Southern Ethiopia, 2020.

INTRODUCTION: Syphilis is one of the leading causes of perinatal morbidity and mortality and is one of the most important public health problems. There was no study showing syphilis serostatus and its related factors among pregnant women in the current study area. This study was aimed to assess the magnitude of syphilis serostatus and associated factors among pregnant women attending antenatal care in Jinka town public health facilities.
METHOD: Institution based cross-sectional study design was conducted in Jinka town public health facilities, southern Ethiopia from the 1st July to the 1st September, 2020. A systematic sampling technique was used to select 629 study subjects. Data were collected using a structured questionnaire through face-to-face interviews and records were reviewed to check syphilis test results. Data were coded and entered by using Epi-data version 4.432 and analyzed using SPSS version 25. The binary logistic regression model was used to investigate factors associated with syphilis. A p-value of < 0.05 at multivariable analysis was considered statistically significant. RESULT: In this study, syphilis sero-prevalence among pregnant women attending antenatal care clinics was 4.8% (95% CI: 3.12, 6.48). Rural residence [AOR: 2.873; 95%CI (1.171, 7.050)], alcohol use [AOR: 3.340; 95% CI (1.354, 8.241)] and having multiple sexual partner [AOR: 5.012; 95% CI (1.929, 13.020)] were statistically significantly associated with syphilis.
CONCLUSION: Sero-prevalence of syphilis was high. Being a rural residence, having multiple sexual partners, alcohol use were factors associated with syphilis. Therefore, substantial efforts have to be made to provide regular health education for pregnant women at the antenatal clinic on the avoidance of risky behaviors and the risk of syphilis on their pregnancy.

Introduction

Syphilis is a chronic systemic infection caused by the spirochete Treponema pallidum, which can be transmitted sexually and during a blood transfusion (acquired syphilis), and vertically (congenital syphilis) through the mother’s placenta to the fetus [1]. Pregnant women who are infected with syphilis can transmit the infection to their fetus, causing congenital syphilis. The majority of pregnant women with syphilis are not detected and treated early enough to avoid the adverse effects of infection on their pregnancy. There is also antenatal care coverage and syphilis testing variation. It remains an important global public health problem, and its incidence is increasing in different parts of the world [2-4].

Early diagnosis and treatment of syphilis in pregnancy are well-recognized as an effective strategy to reduce syphilis transmission and adverse pregnancy outcomes due to untreated maternal syphilis. In endemic countries, antenatal screening for syphilis detection and treatment can reduce the number of stillbirths by 82%, preterm birth by 64%, and neonatal deaths by 80% [5].

Several studies in different parts of the world have shown that syphilis in pregnancy continuing as a public health concern. A report on global sexually transmitted infection surveillance indicated that the sero-prevalence of syphilis among ANC attendees was 0.8% globally. According to this report, in WHO regions of the Americas and African regions showed the sero-prevalence of syphilis was 0.7% and 2% respectively [6]. A study done in Tanzania revealed that 2.5% of pregnant women attending ANC were seropositive for syphilis [7]. In Ethiopia, the 2014 ANC based sentinel surveillance report showed that sero-prevalence of syphilis was 1.2% [8].

Syphilis is a major preventable and treatable contributor to infant morbidity and mortality. Worldwide, about 53% to 82% of untreated maternal syphilis cases result in adverse pregnancy outcomes including early fetal loss, stillbirth, preterm birth, low birth weight, and neonatal death [9]. It results in a global congenital syphilis rate of 473 per 100,000 live births and the African region an estimated CS case rate of 1,119 per 100,000 live births which accounted for 62% of the total CS cases [10].

Maternal age, residence, educational level, educational level of husband, occupational status, occupational status of the husband, number of pregnancy, history of abortion, history of STI, and HIV/AIDS status have been some of the factors studied and reported in different epidemiologic studies as they affect the magnitude of syphilis serostatus. However, there are important contributing factors like alcohol use, knowledge about STI, having two or more sexual partners which were given little attention and thus are not well studied and understood [11, 12].

Globally, the coverage of ANC first visit, syphilis screening, and treatment among pregnant women in 2016 were, 88%, 66%, and 78% respectively. In the African region, the coverage of ANC first, syphilis screening, and treatment were, 83%, 47%, and 76% consequently [10]. In Ethiopia, ANC first and syphilis screening coverage was 62% and 44.6% respectively [13, 14].

Despite these efforts, syphilis is still one of the leading causes of perinatal morbidity and mortality in most of the developing countries including Ethiopia and is one of the most important public health problems. In Ethiopia, the 2012 and 2014 ANC based sentinel surveillance report showed a slight increment of syphilis serostatus from 1.0% in 2012 to 1.2% in 2014 [8]. Therefore, a proper understanding of associated factors may give evidence to plan an intervention on these determinants, improve treatment compliance, and improve health promotion strategies in a variety of contexts. Up-to-date evidence for determinant factors associated with syphilis among pregnant women in Ethiopia as well as in the study area is essential.

To the best of our knowledge, the availability of the study on syphilis and its associated factors is limited in Southern Ethiopia. And at present, there is no study on the burden and associated factors of syphilis among pregnant women in Jinka town. This study was aimed to fill this gap by assessing the seroprevalence of syphilis in pregnant women and identifying associated factors among the target women in Jinka town public health facilities, Southern Ethiopia.

Methods

Study area and priod

The study was conducted in Jinka town public health facilities from the 1st July to the 1st September 2020. Jinka is the capital city of the south Omo zone, southern Ethiopia. It is located 733km from the capital city of Ethiopia (Addis Ababa) and 462km from Hawassa which is the capital city of SNNPR. It has a latitude and longitude of 5˚47’N 36˚34’E /5.783˚N 36.567˚E and an elevation of 1490 meters above sea level. According to the town health office report, the total population projected for 2020 is 42,219, of whom 21,531 are females. The number of females in the reproductive age group (15–49 years) in the town were 10,061. The government health facilities in this town were one hospital, one health center, six health posts.

Study design

An institution-based cross-sectional study was used.

Population

Source population

All pregnant women attending ANC in public health facilities of Jinka town.

Study population

Pregnant women attending ANC clinic in public health facilities which fulfill the inclusion criteria during the study period.

Inclusion and exclusion criteria

Inclusion criteria

Pregnant women attending antenatal care visits were eligible for the study.

Exclusion criteria

Pregnant women who were seriously ill at the time of the study period were excluded.

Sample size determination

The sample size for the sero-prevalence of syphilis was determined using a single population proportion formula, assuming a 95% confidence level and by taking 5.1% sero-prevalence of syphilis from a previous study conducted at Yirgalem, Southern Ethiopia [15] and considering 10% non-response rate. The final sample size was 512.

The sample size determination using factors associated with syphilis serostatus among pregnant women attending antenatal care, was calculated by Epi Info 7 Stat Calc program, 2020 using the assumptions and it was 629. The sample size calculated using predictor variables was greater than the sample size determined using the prevalence of syphilis from a previous study. So, by taking the larger number, the final sample size for the study was 629.

Sampling technique and procedure

The public health facilities in the study area were one hospital and one health center. All ANC visit pregnant women who came to these two health facilities were included in the study. The proportionate allocation method was used to assign the number of pregnant women to each health facility based on the flow of pregnant women per month taking the last sixth months HMIS antenatal records. Finally, a systematic random sampling technique was applied to select 629 study participants.

The number of pregnant women who have attended antenatal care in the study public health facilities in the last two months were 1272. The sample was proportionally allocated to the two public health institutions ().

Data collection tool and procedure

A face-to-face interview was conducted using a semi-structured, pretested and standardized questionnaire to obtain data about socio-demographic, obstetric, medical, and behavioral conditions. The questionnaire has included questions that contain all the required data. The questionnaire was initially developed in English and then translated to the Amharic language for ease of communication with the study participants, and translated back to English to confirm consistency. Data were collected after obtaining informed consent from the study participants. Records were reviewed to check syphilis and HIV test results. Data were collected by three female clinical and one male BSc midwives and supervised by one female BSc midwife and one male public health officer selected from facilities. The training was given on the data collection process for a day.

Study variables

Dependent variable

Syphilis serostatus.

Independent variables

Socio-demographic variable. Age, residence, educational level, educational level of husband, occupational status, occupational status of the husband.

Obstetric related variables. Gravidity, history of abortion.

Medical-related variables. Previous history of STI, HIV/AIDS status.

Behavior related variables. Alcohol use, multiple sexual partners.

Operational definitions

Case Definition of Syphilis. In this study, a case of syphilis was considered when Rapid Plasma Reagin (RPR) or Venereal Disease Research Laboratory (VDRL) test was reactive for syphilis infection among pregnant women [16].

Knowledge of STI. six questions were used for assessing the level of knowledge. The total score of each study participant was converted to a percentage and used to categorize them into those with good knowledge (score> = 50) and poor knowledge (score <50) [17].

Alcohol use. consuming alcohol at least once per month in the last twelve months (above the recommended level) [13].

Multiple sexual partners. having two or more sexual partner in the lifetime

Data quality management

To ensure data quality, one-day training was given for the data collectors and supervisors to create a common understanding. Before the actual data collection, a pre-test was conducted in Koybe hospital on 32 individuals (5%) using a structured questionnaire. Based on the finding necessary correction was made. The principal investigator and supervisors were actively involved in the supervision of the data collection. Data collectors were instructed to check the completeness of each questionnaire whether each question was completely answered and the supervisors rechecked the completeness of the questionnaire immediately after submission. The filled questionnaires were checked daily for completeness by the supervisors and principal investigator.

Data processing and analysis

Data were coded and entered into EPI data version 4.432 and then exported to SPSS version 25 for analysis. Data cleaning was performed by running the frequency of each variable to check the accuracy, inconsistency, and missed value of the data. Descriptive statistics were done and summarized using texts, tables, and graphs based on the type of variables.

In bivariable logistic regression analysis variables having P-value ≤ 0.2 was a potential candidate for multivariable logistic regression analysis to control confounders. The degree of association between independent and dependent variables was assessed by using an odds ratio with a 95% confidence interval and variables having P-value <0.05 in the multivariable logistic regression model were considered as statistically significant. Model fitness was checked by Hosmer and Lemeshow Goodness of fit test (p-value = 0.936) and multi-collinearity was assessed using the method variance inflation factors.

Ethics approval and consent to participate

The study protocol was approved by the Institutional Review Board (IRB) of the College of Health Sciences, Arba Minch University with meeting number 203/2020. A letter of permission was obtained from the South Omo zone health office and Jinka town administration health office and letter of cooperation were also written to the study health facilities. Data collectors approached the study participants by keeping physical distance, using a face mask, and sanitizer to protect COVID-19. ANC clients were informed about the purpose of the study and written informed consent was obtained before data collection. The information collected is kept confidential.

Result

Socio-demographic characteristics of participants

A total of 629 pregnant women attending antenatal care in public health facilities were invited to participate in the study. Of these, 624 pregnant women participated in the study making the response rate of 99.2%. The age range of the study participants was from 18–42 years and the mean (±SD) age of respondents was 25.68 (±4.402) years. The majority of 588(94.2%) of study participants were married and 306(49%) of the participants attended secondary education and above. More than three fourth (79.3%) of the pregnant women were urban residents and 246(39.6%) were housewives. More than one third (36.1%) of participants earned >3,000 ETB (Table 1).

Table 1

Socio-demographic characteristics of study participants in Jinka town public health facilities, southern Ethiopia, August 21-September 9, 2020 (n = 624).

Variables	Category	Frequency	Percent
Age category	18–24	244	39.1
	25–29	252	40.4
	30–42	128	20.5
Marital status	Married	588	94.2
	Single	16	2.6
	Divorced	14	2.2
	Widowed	6	1.0
Religion	Orthodox	386	61.9
	Protestant	204	32.7
	Muslim	34	5.4
Residence	Urban	495	79.3
	Rural	129	20.7
Family type	Monogamous	578	92.6
	Polygamous	46	7.4
Education	No formal education	123	19.7
	Primary education	195	31.3
	Secondary and above	306	49
Partner education	No formal education	95	15.2
	Primary education	199	31.9
	Secondary and above	330	52.9
Occupation	Housewife	255	40.9
	Merchant	156	25
	Government employee	153	24.5
	Others*	60	9.6
Partner occupation	Merchant	182	29.2
	Government employee	168	26.9
	Farmer	128	20.5
	private employee	125	20.0
	Others	21	3.4
Monthly income (ETB)	500–1000	60	9.6
	1001–2000	131	21.0
	2001–3000	208	33.3
	3001–10000	225	36.1

Obstetric characteristics of participants

From the total study participants four hundred twenty (67.3%) of the study participants were multigravida. Out of 624 respondents, the majority 479 (76.8%) were screened for syphilis in the second trimester, whereas 94 (15.1%) and 51 (8.2%) of them were screened for syphilis in the first and third trimesters of their pregnancy respectively. Nearly one-third (34.8%) of the participants had ANC first visit, while ninety-nine (15.9%) of them were in their fourth ANC visit. From the total respondents fifty-nine (9.5%) of participants reported a history of abortion.

Medical characteristics of participants

From the total respondents sixty-one (9.8%) of the participants were reactive for HIV serostatus. Among these, thirteen (21.3%) women knew their HIV status for the first time ().

Behavior related characteristics

Of the total respondent’s two hundred seventy-three (43.8%) of the participants had two or more sexual partners in their lifetime ().

Knowledge related characteristics

Among 624 study participants, 275(44.1%), 235(37.7%), 135 (21.6%), 105 (16.8%) of the study participants got information about STI from school, health institutions, media, and peer (neighbor) respectively. Nearly two-third (61.4%) of study subjects had awareness about the transmission of STI and while 473 (75.8%) did not know the symptom of the disease. Nearly one-third of 192 (30.8%) study participants knew the common types of STI. More than half of 321 (51.4%), study participants had awareness about the prevention of mother to child transmission. From the total respondent’s, nearly three-fourth (72.1%) of the participants knew that STDs could be prevented through the use of a condom. Among 624 study participants, two hundred seventeen (34.8%) of study participants had good knowledge about STI.

Seroprevalence of syphilis

Among the total study participants, the seroprevalence of syphilis using the RPR or VDRL test was 30 (4.8%) (95% CI, [3.12, 6.48%]). The magnitude of syphilis was high in women older than 30 years (12.5%), pregnant women with high syphilis seroprevalence were found among rural dwelling (10.9%), who were illiterate (9.8), whose husbands were illiterate (9.5%), who were occupationally housewives (6.7%). Syphilis sero-positivity was also high in multigravida women (6.2%). Likewise, a high seroprevalence of syphilis was found on those who had two or more sexual partners (8.8%) and who drank alcohol (6.7%).

Factors associated with syphilis serostatus

From bivariable logistic regression, age, residence, education, partner education, occupation, gravidity, multiple sexual partners, and use of alcohol were candidate variables for multivariable analysis having a p-value ≤0.2. To control the effects of confounder, multivariable analysis was carried out. In multiple logistic regression, rural residence, alcohol users, having multiple sexual partners were significantly associated with higher odds of seropositive for syphilis.

Women who come from rural parts of the study area were nearly three times more likely to be seropositive for syphilis than women who come from the urban area, AOR (95% CI = 2.873 (1.171, 7.050)). Pregnant women who are alcohol users had significantly greater odds of being seropositive for syphilis than women who are not alcohol users, AOR (95% CI = 3.340 (1.354, 8.241)). The odds of syphilis increased in pregnant women who had multiple sexual partners by approximately five times than women who had a single sexual partner, AOR (95% CI = 5.012 (1.929, 13.020)) ().

Discussion

The overall seroprevalence of syphilis among pregnant women attending antenatal care was 4.8% with 95% CI, (3.12, 6.48%). In this study, a statistically significant association was observed between syphilis and residence, alcohol use, and having multiple sexual partners. Study participants who were from rural residences, who had multiple sexual partners and drank alcohol were the factors associated with seroprevalence of syphilis.

The finding of this study was found to be comparable with studies conducted at Yirgalem general hospital, in the Democratic Republic of Congo and Brazil which were (5.1%), (4.2%) and (4.4%) respectively [15, 18, 19].

However, the finding of this study was higher than the findings in Bahir Dar-Ethiopia, Gondar-Ethiopia, Nigeria, Bangladesh, and Hungary which were (2.6%), (2.9%), (1.98%), (2.96%), and (2.9%) consequently [12, 20–23]. The possible reason for the difference in the seroprevalence of syphilis between studies might be explained by the difference in socio-demographic characteristics, the cultural difference across the population, the data source (primary or secondary data), and methods used for diagnosis.

On the other hand, the finding of this study was lower than studies done in South Sudan and Zambia (22.1%) and (9.3%) respectively [24, 25]. The possible reason might be due to a difference in the study period and difference in population.

Pregnant women who were from the rural area were nearly three times more likely to syphilis seropositive as compared to their counterparts. The finding of this study is supported by other studies conducted in the Democratic Republic of Congo [18], Tanzania [7], Bahir Dar [20], and Gondar [26]. This might be explained by the fact that women who live in rural areas have no better access to information; education, communication, and health facilities, poor understanding of health service at ANC, than their urban counterparts. Moreover, cultural practices are more prominent in rural areas than in urban.

The finding in this study is contrary to a study conducted in Nigeria [21]. The possible reason for the difference in the findings might be due to the difference in population and more sexual practices common in urban than rural areas.

In this study, the risk of syphilis in pregnant women who had a history of multiple sexual partners was five times more likely to be infected than their counterparts. This is in agreement with the reports of China [27], Zambia [24], and Bahir Dar, Ethiopia [20], who noted increased odds of syphilis among women with many sexual partners as compared to those with one sexual partner. The possible reason might be explained as having many sexual partners increase vulnerability for STIs due to unsafe sexual practices and due to the low level of awareness on the transmission and prevention methods of STI.

The result of this study revealed also the presence of a significant association between alcohol use and seroprevalence of syphilis. Pregnant women who had a history of alcohol consumption were found to be about three times more likely to be seropositive for syphilis infection than those counterparts. This finding is in line with other studies conducted in Tanzania where pregnant women with a history of alcohol intake were around six times more likely to be seropositive for syphilis [28]. This might be explained by the fact that alcohol intake could be one of the numerous health-related determinant factors such women commence, including concomitant multiple sexual partnerships and a high rate of unsafe sexual practice that predisposes to the acquisition of Sexually transmitted infections (STIs) including syphilis.

Conclusion

This study revealed that syphilis was prevalent among pregnant women, indicating that it is a significant public health problem. Study participants who were from a rural area, having multiple sexual partners and alcohol use were found to be a factor that significantly increases the risk of being infected with syphilis among pregnant women.

Limitation of the study

Since there was card review to address some variables there may have missing data and by the fact that they are carried out at one time point and give no indication of the sequence of events so, it is impossible to infer causality.

Data collection tool.

(DOCX)

Click here for additional data file.

The dataset used for this study.

(SAV)

Click here for additional data file.

30 Jul 2021

PONE-D-21-19327

Magnitude of Syphilis Sero-status And Associated Factors among Pregnant Women Attending Antenatal Care in Jinka Town Public Health Facilities, Southern Ethiopia, 2020

PLOS ONE

Dear Dr. Getie,

Thank you for submitting your manuscript to PLOS ONE. After careful consideration, we feel that it has merit but does not fully meet PLOS ONE’s publication criteria as it currently stands. Therefore, we invite you to submit a revised version of the manuscript that addresses the points raised during the review process.

Please submit your revised manuscript by Sep 11 2021 11:59PM. If you will need more time than this to complete your revisions, please reply to this message or contact the journal office at plosone@plos.org. When you're ready to submit your revision, log on to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/ and select the 'Submissions Needing Revision' folder to locate your manuscript file.

Please include the following items when submitting your revised manuscript:

A rebuttal letter that responds to each point raised by the academic editor and reviewer(s). You should upload this letter as a separate file labeled 'Response to Reviewers'.

A marked-up copy of your manuscript that highlights changes made to the original version. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Revised Manuscript with Track Changes'.

An unmarked version of your revised paper without tracked changes. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Manuscript'.

If you would like to make changes to your financial disclosure, please include your updated statement in your cover letter. Guidelines for resubmitting your figure files are available below the reviewer comments at the end of this letter.

If applicable, we recommend that you deposit your laboratory protocols in protocols.io to enhance the reproducibility of your results. Protocols.io assigns your protocol its own identifier (DOI) so that it can be cited independently in the future. For instructions see: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submission-guidelines#loc-laboratory-protocols. Additionally, PLOS ONE offers an option for publishing peer-reviewed Lab Protocol articles, which describe protocols hosted on protocols.io. Read more information on sharing protocols at https://plos.org/protocols?utm_medium=editorial-email&utm_source=authorletters&utm_campaign=protocols.

We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript.

Kind regards,

Jianguo Wang, PhD

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Journal requirements:

When submitting your revision, we need you to address these additional requirements.

1. Please ensure that your manuscript meets PLOS ONE's style requirements, including those for file naming. The PLOS ONE style templates can be found at

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=wjVg/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_main_body.pdf and

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=ba62/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_title_authors_affiliations.pdf

2. lease include additional information regarding the survey or questionnaire used in the study and ensure that you have provided sufficient details that others could replicate the analyses. For instance, if you developed a questionnaire as part of this study and it is not under a copyright more restrictive than CC-BY, please include a copy, in both the original language and English, as Supporting Information. If the original language is written in non-Latin characters, for example Amharic, Chinese, or Korean, please use a file format that ensures these characters are visible.

3. Please state whether you validated the questionnaire prior to testing on study participants. Please provide details regarding the validation group within the methods section.

4. Please amend your current ethics statement to address the following concerns: Please explain why written consent was not obtained, how you recorded/documented participant consent, and if the ethics committees/IRBs approved this consent procedure.

5. Please note that in order to use the direct billing option the corresponding author must be affiliated with the chosen institute. Please either amend your manuscript to change the affiliation or corresponding author, or email us at plosone@plos.org with a request to remove this option

6. In your Data Availability statement, you have not specified where the minimal data set underlying the results described in your manuscript can be found. PLOS defines a study's minimal data set as the underlying data used to reach the conclusions drawn in the manuscript and any additional data required to replicate the reported study findings in their entirety. All PLOS journals require that the minimal data set be made fully available. For more information about our data policy, please see http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/data-availability.

Upon re-submitting your revised manuscript, please upload your study’s minimal underlying data set as either Supporting Information files or to a stable, public repository and include the relevant URLs, DOIs, or accession numbers within your revised cover letter. For a list of acceptable repositories, please see http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/data-availability#loc-recommended-repositories. Any potentially identifying patient information must be fully anonymized.

Important: If there are ethical or legal restrictions to sharing your data publicly, please explain these restrictions in detail. Please see our guidelines for more information on what we consider unacceptable restrictions to publicly sharing data: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/data-availability#loc-unacceptable-data-access-restrictions. Note that it is not acceptable for the authors to be the sole named individuals responsible for ensuring data access.

We will update your Data Availability statement to reflect the information you provide in your cover letter.

7. We note you have included a table to which you do not refer in the text of your manuscript. Please ensure that you refer to Table 2 in your text; if accepted, production will need this reference to link the reader to the Table.

8. Please include a copy of Table 4 which you refer to in your text on page 11.

9. Please review your reference list to ensure that it is complete and correct. If you have cited papers that have been retracted, please include the rationale for doing so in the manuscript text, or remove these references and replace them with relevant current references. Any changes to the reference list should be mentioned in the rebuttal letter that accompanies your revised manuscript. If you need to cite a retracted article, indicate the article’s retracted status in the References list and also include a citation and full reference for the retraction notice.

[Note: HTML markup is below. Please do not edit.]

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented.

Reviewer #1: Yes

**********

2. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

Reviewer #1: Yes

**********

3. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.

Reviewer #1: Yes

**********

4. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.

Reviewer #1: Yes

**********

5. Review Comments to the Author

Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters)

Reviewer #1: REVIEW

of manuscript number PONE-D-21-19327, entitled “ Magnitude of Syphilis Sero-status And Associated Factors among Pregnant Women Attending Antenatal Care in Jinka Town Public Health Facilities, Southern Ethiopia, 2020”

The manuscript submitted for review provides epidemiological information on the distribution of syphilis among pregnant women in an Ethiopian town. As well stated in the Introduction Section, the disease is one of the most important global health problems. As the Sub-Saharan population is of increased risk with relatively high seroprevalence, information about syphilis epidemiology is urgently needed. The work fits well in the scope of the journal and although this is a simple analysis that adds nothing to the global current knowledge, it may provide useful information for the national and regional health authorities to implement more adequate prevention and information programs. The paper is written in simple and very clear language that makes it readable by a broad target audience (however language and style editing is needed; someone should carefully read the manuscript and correct the grammar errors). Additionally, all analyses used are well and sufficiently described.

However, the following deficiencies should be indicated:

• The study design and the paper design are very similar to those of an already published work dealing with the same research problem (High seroprevalence of syphilis infection among pregnant women in Yiregalem hospital southern Ethiopia by Anteneh Amsalu, Getachew Ferede and Demissie Assegu, published in BMC Infectious Diseases, 2018, 18). I have the impression that the authors have taken the above-mentioned paper and have applied the same design to a different population.

• The confirmatory character of the work. The paper confirms well-known facts and no novel associations of syphilis seroprevalence in pregnant were found.

• The limitations of the work are not stated and discussed in the Discussion section.

• Abbreviations, such as ANC, CS, COR, AOR, although clear, should be clarified at the first time of use.

• Figures 2 & 3 are unnecessary. The information given in the text is enough.

**********

6. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #1: Yes: Tatina Todorova

[NOTE: If reviewer comments were submitted as an attachment file, they will be attached to this email and accessible via the submission site. Please log into your account, locate the manuscript record, and check for the action link "View Attachments". If this link does not appear, there are no attachment files.]

While revising your submission, please upload your figure files to the Preflight Analysis and Conversion Engine (PACE) digital diagnostic tool, https://pacev2.apexcovantage.com/. PACE helps ensure that figures meet PLOS requirements. To use PACE, you must first register as a user. Registration is free. Then, login and navigate to the UPLOAD tab, where you will find detailed instructions on how to use the tool. If you encounter any issues or have any questions when using PACE, please email PLOS at figures@plos.org. Please note that Supporting Information files do not need this step.

20 Aug 2021

Author’s Point-by-Point Response to the Reviewer's and Editors Reports

Title: Magnitude of Syphilis Sero-status And Associated Factors among Pregnant Women Attending Antenatal Care in Jinka Town Public Health Facilities, Southern Ethiopia, 2020

Corresponding author: Asmare Getie/ asmaregetie2017@gmail.com

ID: - PONE-D-21-19327

Journal: PLOS ONE

Point by point response to Reviewers and Editors

First of all, the authors would like to thank PLOSE ONE Journal editors and the respective reviewers for reviewing our manuscript and providing the necessary comments to be corrected. As per the comments given, we have made corrections point by point to comment. The authors tried to answer all the issues raised by editorial team and reviewers. Please note that we gave our response in blue font color.

Comment 1: please include additional information regarding the survey or questionnaire used in the study and ensure that you have provided sufficient details that others could replicate the analyses.

Response 1: the questionaries’ were putted as supporting information in the manuscript and it was submitted to the journal as supporting information

Comment 2: Please state whether you validated the questionnaire prior to testing on study participants. Please provide details regarding the validation group within the methods section

Response 2: The questionnaire was already validated hand used by other previous studies

Comment 3. Please amend your current ethics statement to address the following concerns: Please explain why written consent was not obtained, how you recorded/documented participant consent, and if the ethics committees/IRBs approved this consent procedure.

Response 3: Thank you for this suggestion, actually it was editorial error, we have taken written consent from the study participants. It was corrected in the manuscript part.

Comment 4. Please note that in order to use the direct billing option the corresponding author must be affiliated with the chosen institute. Please either amend your manuscript to change the affiliation or corresponding author,

Response 4: thank you very much, it was corrected accordingly. The corrected one was appreciated in the manuscript.

Comment 5: In your Data Availability statement, you have not specified where the minimal data set underlying the results described in your manuscript can be found. PLOS defines a study's minimal data set as the underlying data used to reach the conclusions drawn in the manuscript and any additional data required to replicate the reported study findings in their entirety. All PLOS journals require that the minimal data set be made fully available. For more information about our data policy, please see http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/data-availability.

Response 5: thank you very much for this suggestion, the data was mentioned in the manuscript under supporting information and it was uploaded to the journal as supporting information.

Comment 6. We note you have included a table to which you do not refer in the text of your manuscript. Please ensure that you refer to Table 2 in your text; if accepted, production will need this reference to link the reader to the Table.

Response 6: thank you, it is corrected accordingly

Comment 7. Please include a copy of Table 4 which you refer to in your text on page 11

Response 7: thank you, it was corrected as accordingly

Comment 8: The limitations of the work are not stated and discussed in the Discussion section.

Response 8: thank you very much, as per your recommendation the limitations of this study was incorporated in the manuscript part

comment 9: Abbreviations, such as ANC, CS, COR, AOR, although clear, should be clarified at the first time of use.

Response 9: those abbreviations were clarified accordingly

comment 10: Figures 2 & 3 are unnecessary. The information given in the text is enough.

Response 10: thank you very much as per your recommendation figures 2 and 3 were excluded

Submitted filename: point by point response.docx

Click here for additional data file.

31 Aug 2021

Magnitude of Syphilis Sero-status And Associated Factors among Pregnant Women Attending Antenatal Care in Jinka Town Public Health Facilities, Southern Ethiopia, 2020

PONE-D-21-19327R1

Dear Dr. Getie,

We’re pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been judged scientifically suitable for publication and will be formally accepted for publication once it meets all outstanding technical requirements.

Within one week, you’ll receive an e-mail detailing the required amendments. When these have been addressed, you’ll receive a formal acceptance letter and your manuscript will be scheduled for publication.

An invoice for payment will follow shortly after the formal acceptance. To ensure an efficient process, please log into Editorial Manager at http://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/, click the 'Update My Information' link at the top of the page, and double check that your user information is up-to-date. If you have any billing related questions, please contact our Author Billing department directly at authorbilling@plos.org.

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please notify them about your upcoming paper to help maximize its impact. If they’ll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team as soon as possible -- no later than 48 hours after receiving the formal acceptance. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information, please contact onepress@plos.org.

Kind regards,

Jianguo Wang, PhD

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Additional Editor Comments (optional):

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. If the authors have adequately addressed your comments raised in a previous round of review and you feel that this manuscript is now acceptable for publication, you may indicate that here to bypass the “Comments to the Author” section, enter your conflict of interest statement in the “Confidential to Editor” section, and submit your "Accept" recommendation.

Reviewer #1: All comments have been addressed

**********

2. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented.

Reviewer #1: Yes

**********

3. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

Reviewer #1: Yes

**********

4. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.

Reviewer #1: Yes

**********

5. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.

Reviewer #1: Yes

**********

6. Review Comments to the Author

Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters)

Reviewer #1: The authors have adequately addressed all comments raised in a previous round of review and I don't have any additional comments.

**********

7. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #1: Yes: Tatina Todorova

2 Sep 2021

PONE-D-21-19327R1

Magnitude of Syphilis Sero-status And Associated Factors among Pregnant Women Attending Antenatal Care in Jinka Town Public Health Facilities, Southern Ethiopia, 2020

Dear Dr. Getie:

I'm pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been deemed suitable for publication in PLOS ONE. Congratulations! Your manuscript is now with our production department.

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please let them know about your upcoming paper now to help maximize its impact. If they'll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team within the next 48 hours. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information please contact onepress@plos.org.

If we can help with anything else, please email us at plosone@plos.org.

Thank you for submitting your work to PLOS ONE and supporting open access.

Kind regards,

PLOS ONE Editorial Office Staff

on behalf of

Dr. Jianguo Wang

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Table 2

Medical-related characteristics of pregnant women attending ANC in Jinka town public health facilities, Southern Ethiopia, 2020.

Variables	Category	Frequency	Percent
History of STI	Yes	24	2.9
	No	600	97.1
HIV serostatus	Reactive	61	9.8
	Non-reactive	563	90.2

Table 3

Behavior related characteristics of study participants in Jinka town public health facilities, Southern Ethiopia, 2020.

Variables	Category	Frequency	Percent
Multiple sexual partners (lifetime)	Yes	273	43.8
	No	351	56.2
Multiple sexual partners (<12 months)	Yes	49	7.9
	No	575	92.1
Alcohol use	Yes	329	52.7
	No	295	47.3

Table 4

Factors associated with seroprevalence of syphilis among ANC attendees in Jinka town public health facilities, southern Ethiopia, bivariable and multivariable analysis, 2020.

Variable	Category	Syphilis		COR(95%CI)	AOR(95%CI)
		(n = 624)
		R	NR
Age	<25	8	236	1	1
	25–29	6	246	0.720 (0.246, 2.105)	0.419 (0.125, 1.411)
	30–42	16	112	4.214 (1.752, 10.140)	1.579 (0.464, 5.375)
Residence	Urban	16	479	1	1
	Rural	14	115	3.645 (1.729, 7.682)	2.873 (1.171, 7.050)
Education	No formal education	12	111	3.568 (1.463, 8.699)	1.211 (0.308, 4.757)
	Primary education	9	186	1.597 (0.623, 4.096)	1.017 (0.317, 3.263)
	Secondary and above	9	297	1	1
Partner education	No formal education	9	86	4.212(1.578,11.242)	1.322 (0.354, 4.938)
	Primary education	13	186	2.813 (1.145, 6.913)	1.962 (0.709, 5.430)
	Secondary and above	8	322	1	1
Occupation
	Housewife	17	238	3.571 (1.029,12.394)	1.279 (0.253, 6.460)
	Merchant	7	149	2.349 (.596, 9.257)	1.181 (0.246, 5.660)
	Others	3	57	2.632 (.516, 13.419)	1.361 (0.209, 8.864)
	Employee	3	150	1	1
Gravida	Prim gravida	4	200	1	1
	Multigravida	26	394	3.299 (1.136, 9.584)	2.210 (0.605, 8.079)
Alcohol use	Yes	22	307	2.571 (1.127, 5.867)	3.340 (1.354,8.241)
	No	8	287	1	1
Multiple sexual partners	Yes	24	249	5.542 (2.232, 13.759)	5.012 (1.929,13.02)
	No	6	345	1	1