Chlamydia Antibodies, Chlamydia Heat Shock Protein, and Adverse Sequelae After Pelvic Inflammatory Disease: The PID Evaluation and Clinical Health (PEACH) Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In Brief Background: Among women with pelvic inflammatory disease (PID), we assessed the associations among antibodies to Chlamydia trachomatis elementary bodies (EB), antibodies to chlamydia heat shock protein (Chsp60), rates of pregnancy, and PID recurrence. Methods: Four hundred forty-three women with clinical signs and symptoms of mild to moderate PID enrolled in the PID Evaluation and Clinical Health Study were followed for a mean of 84 months for outcomes of time-to-pregnancy and time-to-PID recurrence. Antibodies to EB and Chsp60 were assessed in relation to these long-term sequelae of PID. Results: Rates of pregnancy were significantly lower (adj. hazard ratio 0.47, 95% confidence interval 0.28–0.79) and PID recurrence higher (adj. hazard ratio 2.48, 95% confidence interval 1.00–6.27) after adjusting for confounding factors among women whose antibody titers to chlamydia EB measured in the final year of follow-up were in the highest tertile. Conclusion: Among women with mild to moderate PID, antibodies to C. trachomatis were independently associated with reduced rates of pregnancy and elevated rates of recurrent PID. Among women with mild to moderate pelvic inflammatory disease, antibodies to Chlamydia trachomatis were independently associated with reduced rates of pregnancy and elevated rates of recurrent pelvic inflammatory disease.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".