Comparison of dacron and nylon-flocked self-collected vaginal swabs and urine for the detection of<i>Trichomonas vaginalis</i>using analyte-specific reagents in a transcription-mediated amplification assay: Table 1
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To compare self-collected vaginal swab (SCVS) types and first-catch urine (FCU) to diagnose Trichomonas vaginalis using analyte-specific reagents designed to be used in a transcription-mediated amplification assay. METHODS: A total of 241 women (group A) collected a FCU and a SCVS using a dacron swab (APTIMA collection kit). A second group of 289 women (group B) collected two SCVS using one dacron swab and one nylon-flocked swab. RESULTS: Of 75 young women (street youth) determined to be infected with T vaginalis only seven reported symptoms of vaginal discharge or irritation. Using a cutoff of 50,000 relative light units, the sensitivity and specificity was 97.2% and 97.6%, respectively for dacron SCVS compared with 41.7% and 100% for FCU in group A; 92.3% and 98.8% for dacron SCVS and 92.3% and 99.2% for flocked-nylon SCVS in group B. The assay tested 96 samples in 6 h. CONCLUSIONS: Dacron and nylon-flocked SCVS performed equally well and significantly better than FCU using analyte-specific reagents in the APTIMA transcription-mediated amplification assay. Either swab type could be used for self-collection.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".