A systematic review and meta-analysis of the prevalence of chlamydia, gonorrhoea and syphilis in incarcerated persons
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Communicable diseases are common in people who are incarcerated. We aimed to define the prevalence of chlamydia, gonorrhoea and syphilis in people who are incarcerated and to identify subgroups with the highest risk of infection. We searched for prevalence studies of chlamydia, gonorrhoea or syphilis in incarcerated populations. Pooled estimates were generated, and meta-regression was conducted. Random effects models yielded pooled prevalence estimates of 5.75% (95% confidence interval [CI] 5.01, 6.48) and 12.31% (95% CI 10.61, 14.01) for chlamydia in men and women, 1.4% (95% CI 1.09, 1.70) and 5.73% (4.76, 6.69) for gonorrhoea in men and women, and 2.45% (95% CI 2.08, 2.82) and 6.10% (95% CI 4.75, 7.46) for syphilis in men and women, respectively. Each infection was associated with female gender in meta-regression models. Chlamydia, gonorrhoea and syphilis are highly prevalent in these populations. Primary and secondary prevention efforts could improve individual and population health.
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 | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".