Strong Correspondence of the Vaginal and Rectal Load of Group B Streptococci in Pregnant Women
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: To establish the potential role of the rectum as a reservoir for vaginal Streptococcus agalactiae (group B streptococci, GBS), both sites were sampled simultaneously and the bacterial loads of GBS were established by quantitative PCR (qPCR), for 100 pregnant women at 35 - 37 weeks of gestation. Methods: Vaginal and rectal occurrence of GBS was detected by qPCR, for 100 pregnant women at 35 - 37 weeks of gestation. DNA was extracted from vaginal (V), rectal (R) and vaginorectal (VR) swabs using the NucliSENS EasyMAG platform and cfb -qPCR, specific for GBS, was carried out for the quantification of GBS. Results: Ten women were found positive for both R and V swabs, 7 positive for R swabs only and 4 positive for V swabs only. Significant positive correlation was found between vaginal and rectal loads of GBS (r = 0.701 , P < 0.0001 ). In addition, the bacterial load of the 28 positive VR swabs (mean log10 cells/mL: 6.24, SD: 0.99; median: 5.82) was always higher than that of the V (mean: 5.72, SD: 0.87; median: 5.56) or R swabs (mean: 5.52, SD 0.72; median: 5.16) separately (P < 0.05). Conclusions: Using qPCR, significant correlation between quantities of vaginal and rectal GBS loads was established. Comparison of sampling methods indicates that VR swabbing yields higher GBS loads and 7 more positive women than separate V and R swabbing, and therefore is preferable for sample collection for GBS detection in pregnant women. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.4021/jcgo185e
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 | 0.000 | 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".