Risk behaviour, healthcare access and prevalence of infection with Chlamydia trachomatis and Neisseria gonorrhoeae in a population-based sample of adults in Barbados
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To estimate the prevalence of urogenital infection with Chlamydia trachomatis and Neisseria gonorrhoeae in people 18 to 35 years of age in Barbados, and to examine factors associated with infection. METHODS: Cross-sectional survey of randomly selected people from the voters' register of one electoral district and the collection of urine samples for testing by PCR. RESULTS: The response rate was 82%; 408 people (195 males and 213 females) completed a questionnaire and had their urine collected. 397 urine samples were satisfactorily tested. Prevalence of C trachomatis urogenital infection was 11.3% (95% CI +/-2.9) and N gonorrhoeae 1.8% (95% CI +/-1.2) with 12.6% (95% CI +/-3.1) having either or both infections. The difference in prevalence by gender was not significant. Multivariate logistic regression showed that prevalence of C trachomatis and/or N gonorrhoeae decreased with increasing age (per year OR 0.89, 95% CI 0.84 to 0.96, p = 0.001), and decreasing time (</=6 months vs >6 months) since last medical consultation (OR 0.44, 95% CI 0.22 to 0.88, p = 0.02). Most (76%) infected people were asymptomatic. Condom use at last intercourse with a partner not being lived with was not protective (reported by 52%, p = 0.617). The usual source of health care was evenly distributed between the public and private sectors and was not associated with infection. Only 30% of people had ever heard of chlamydia, whereas 92% were aware of gonorrhoea. CONCLUSIONS: Asymptomatic infection with C trachomatis is an important reservoir of infection, which will remain undetected unless physicians and young people are made aware of this and screening is introduced.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".