MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Probiotic<i>Lactobacillus</i>dose required to restore and maintain a normal vaginal flora

2001· article· en· W2097453265 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueFEMS Immunology & Medical Microbiology · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicReproductive tract infections research
Canadian institutionsLawson Health Research InstituteWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLactobacillus rhamnosusBacterial vaginosisLactobacillus fermentumVaginal floraProbioticLactobacillusBiologyAsymptomaticFlora (microbiology)MicrobiologyVaginaVaginitisInternal medicineMedicineBacteriaLactic acid

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Forty-two healthy women were randomized to receive one of three encapsulated Lactobacillus rhamnosus GR-1 plus Lactobacillus fermentum RC-14 probiotic dosage regimens or L. rhamnosus GG by mouth each day for 28 days. However, the vaginal flora, assessed by Nugent scoring, was only normal in 40% of the cases, and 14 patients had asymptomatic bacterial vaginosis. Treatment with L. rhamnosus GR-1/L. fermentum RC-14 once and twice daily correlated with a healthy vaginal flora in up to 90% of patients, and 7/11 patients with bacterial vaginosis converted to normal or intermediate scores within 1 month. Ingestion of L. rhamnosus GG failed to have an effect. This study confirms the potential efficacy of orally administered lactobacilli as a non-chemotherapeutic means to restore and maintain a normal urogenital flora, and shows that over 10(8) viable organisms per day is the required dose.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.890
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.004

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.

Opus teacher head0.016
GPT teacher head0.281
Teacher spread0.265 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it