MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Is the Presence of Trichomonas on a Pap Smear Associated with an Increased Incidence of Bacterial Vaginosis?

2006· article· en· W2125558209 on OpenAlexaff
Debra S. Heller, Svetlana Maslyak, Joan Skurnick

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Lower Genital Tract Disease · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicReproductive tract infections research
Canadian institutionsWomen's Health Research Institute
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTrichomonasBacterial vaginosisMedicineIncidence (geometry)Trichomonas vaginalisTrichomonas VaginitisVaginal floraVaginaAnaerobic bacteriaMicrobiologyGynecologyBiologyBacteriaSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: Bacterial vaginosis (BV) is associated with significant morbidity. Bacterial vaginosis is due to an overgrowth of anaerobic organisms in the vagina. It has been postulated that the presence of Trichomonas creates an anaerobic environment that favors BV. Thus, BV should be more frequent in the presence of Trichomonas if Trichomonas is creating a favorable anaerobic environment. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective review of Pap test reports was performed for a diagnosis of coccobacilli consistent with shift in vaginal flora, that is, the presence of clue cells. Cases were Pap smears with Trichomonas identified. Controls were cases without Trichomonas. Results were analyzed using Fisher exact test. RESULTS: Four hundred cases were reviewed; 200 with and 200 without Trichomonas. The incidence of BV was significantly higher in the Trichomonas group (46.5%) than in group without Trichomonas (24.5%) (p < .0001.). CONCLUSION: The presence of Trichomonas on a Pap smear is associated with an increased incidence of BV. The report of Trichomonas on a Pap smear should prompt clinical consideration that BV may be present.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.752
Threshold uncertainty score0.486

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.016
GPT teacher head0.274
Teacher spread0.258 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations16
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Lower Genital Tract DiseaseSame topicReproductive tract infections researchFrench-language works237,207