MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2329103543 · doi:10.1155/2005/717045

Canadian Laboratory Standards for Sexually Transmitted Infections: Best Practice Guidelines

2005· article· en· W2329103543 on OpenAlexaffabout
Max Chernesky, David M. Patrick

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Infectious Diseases and Medical Microbiology · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicReproductive tract infections research
Canadian institutionsBC Centre for Disease ControlMcMaster UniversitySt. Joseph’s Healthcare Hamilton
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChlamydia trachomatisGonorrheaMedicineSyphilisNeisseria gonorrhoeaeEpididymitisCervicitisChlamydiaHaemophilus ducreyiTrichomonas vaginalisTreponemaPelvic inflammatory diseaseImmunologySexually transmitted diseaseSex organUrethritisVirologyGynecologyInternal medicineBiologyHaemophilus influenzaeMicrobiologyHuman immunodeficiency virus (HIV)SurgeryAntibiotics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Sexually transmitted infections (STI) continue to spread, and show no international boundaries. Diseases such as gonorrhea and syphilis, which we thought were under control in Canadian populations, have increased in incidence. Sexually transmitted or associated syndromes such as cervicitis, enteric infections, epididymitis, genital ulcers, sexually related hepatitis, ophthalmia neonatorum, pelvic inflammatory disease, prostatitis and vulvovaginitis present a challenge for the physician to identify the microbial cause, treat the patient and manage contacts. During the past 10 years, new technologies developed for the diagnosis of STIs have provided a clearer understanding of the real accuracy of traditional tests for the diagnosis of infections caused by Chlamydia trachomatis, Neisseria gonorrhoeae, Treponema pallidum, herpes simplex viruses, hepatitis B virus, human papillomaviruses, HIV, Haemophilus ducreyi, Trichomonas vaginalis and mycoplasmas. This has presented a major challenge to the diagnostic laboratory, namely, selecting the most sensitive and specific test matched with the most appropriate specimens to provide meaningful and timely results to facilitate optimal patient care.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.055
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.117
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.442
Threshold uncertainty score0.879

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0550.117
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.003
Bibliometrics0.0120.013
Science and technology studies0.0070.005
Scholarly communication0.0070.003
Open science0.0170.003
Research integrity0.0080.009
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0240.016

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.320
Teacher spread0.309 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations0
Published2005
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Infectious Diseases and Medical Microbiology→Same topicReproductive tract infections research→French-language works237,207→