Sexually Transmitted Infections and Male Circumcision: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Table 4

Studies of the association between circumcision status and the prevalence of genital discharge syndrome.

Study	Intact +ve/−ve	Circumcised +ve/−ve	Odds ratio	95% confidence interval	Exact odds ratio	Exact 95%; confidence interval
Agot	207/237	184/210	1.00	0.76–1.31	0.9968	0.7525–1.3206
Bailey	58/118	65/79	0.60	0.38–0.94	0.5984	0.3657–0.9654
Burundi	48/1612	22/864	1.17	0.70–1.95	1.1693	0.6870–2.0486
Bwayo	88/88	376/383	1.02	0.73–1.41	1.0186	0.7238–1.4336
Gray et al. [44]*	156/4443	33/875	0.92	0.64–1.36	0.9310	0.6312–1.4097
Gray et al. [163]*	503/3967	97/728	0.93	0.64–1.36	0.9516	0.7528–1.2123
Lavreys	47/48	297/354	1.17	0.76–1.80	1.1668	0.7404–1.8383
Newell	77/1279	58/588	0.61	0.43–0.87	0.6105	0.4222–0.8866
Seed	236/358	136/107	0.52	0.38–0.70	0.5159	0.3790–0.7095
Tyndall	86/92	311/321	0.96	0.69–1.35	0.9649	0.6818–1.3646
Warner	2316/2849	14352/21054	1.19	1.12–1.26	1.1925	1.1239–1.2653
Random effects summary effect:					0.8902	0.7277–1.0891

Heterogeneity chi-square (df=9) was 47.36 (𝑃<.0001).
∗The Rakai data published in 2004 was used in calculating the summary effect odds ratio.