Endocervical Gram stain smears and their usefulness in the diagnosis of Chlamydia trachomatis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the usefulness of endocervical Gram stain smears in the diagnosis of Chlamydia trachomatis and Neisseria gonorrhoeae in a female population attending a STD clinic. METHODS: 494 females attending a STD clinic and undergoing a speculum examination had endocervical specimens submitted for C trachomatis culture, direct fluorescent antibody testing (DFA), and N gonorrhoeae culture. Endocervical smears were also collected for Gram stain. The number of polymorphonuclear leucocytes (PMN) per high power field (HPF), presence of bacteria, yeast, red blood cells, and clue cells were recorded. Clinical signs of cervicitis were also documented. RESULTS: N gonorrhoeae was isolated from one subject who was co-infected with C trachomatis and no further analysis was done regarding N gonorrhoeae. Analysis was performed on 220 participants. The prevalence of C trachomatis infection was 13%. Of the Gram smears collected, 55% were inadequate owing to the presence of vaginal contamination. There were an equal number of C trachomatis isolates in patients with < or = 10 PMN/HPF (48%) and > 10 PMN/HPF (52%). Endocervical mucopus and erythema were statistically significant for the presence of C trachomatis (p < 0.001 and 0.02 respectively). The presence of any signs of cervicitis-that is, mucopus, friability, erythema, and ectropion together with > 10 PMN/HPF was statistically significant for the presence of C trachomatis. CONCLUSION: The use of endocervical Gram smear results together with clinical information can be used to identify high risk women for C trachomatis infection.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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".