Prevalence of Chlamydia trachomatis Infections and Specimen Collection Preference Among Women, Using Self-Collected Vaginal Swabs in Community Settings
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Chlamydia trachomatis is a common, often asymptomatic sexually transmitted infection. GOAL: The goal was to estimate the prevalence and predictors of C. trachomatis among young women using self-collected vaginal swabs, and the preferences of women and physicians for self-testing. STUDY DESIGN: A total of 514 attendees of university/college health clinics, adolescent birth control clinics, centers providing health services to homeless youth and adults (street health centers), a sexually transmitted diseases clinic, and family practices were tested by ligase chain reaction. Preference for self- versus provider-testing was examined. RESULTS: Prevalence was 6.0% and was highest (18.2%) in the street health centers. In multivariate analysis, only recent contact with someone with C. trachomatis infection was significantly associated with infection (odds ratio, 7.1; 95% confidence interval, 2.5-20.0). Most women (54.2%; 256 of 472) preferred self-sampling compared with physician sampling (15.9%; 75 of 472). The majority of physicians (75.0%; 9 of 12) reported at the start and end of the study that they would use vaginal swab self-sampling if available. CONCLUSIONS: Prevalence of infection in young women attending homeless youth organizations was high. Self-sampling was acceptable and could facilitate screening in high-risk women who do not regularly access health services.
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 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".