MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2620600252 · doi:10.1136/sextrans-2016-053084

Pilot study for the ‘Test n Treat’ trial of on-site rapid chlamydia/gonorrhoea tests and same day treatment

2017· letter· en· W2620600252 on OpenAlexaff
Anjella Balendra, Emma Cousins, Helen Lamplough, Pippa Oakeshott, Sarah R Kerry

Bibliographic record

VenueSexually Transmitted Infections · 2017
Typeletter
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicReproductive tract infections research
Canadian institutionsInstitute of Infection and Immunity
FundersNational Institute for Health and Care Research
KeywordsMedicineChlamydiaOutreachSexual intercourseGonorrheaTest (biology)Family medicineReproductive healthEthnic groupGynecologyDemographyPopulationImmunologyEnvironmental healthHuman immunodeficiency virus (HIV)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Outreach sexual health services usually target hard to reach, higher risk populations who are not accessing mainstream services. These include some black minority ethnic groups and young people.1 In May 2016, we carried out a pilot study in a Further Education (FE) college to explore the feasibility of providing rapid, on-site chlamydia/gonorrhoea testing with results within 2 hours, and same day treatment if required (‘Test n Treat’). Consecutive students were approached and asked if they were willing to complete a questionnaire and provide a genitourinary sample for rapid chlamydia/gonorrhoea testing. Students who had never had sexual intercourse or were outside the 16–24 years age range were …

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)0.013
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.015
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Non-randomized trial · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.070

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0130.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0070.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0200.005

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 head0.053
GPT teacher head0.329
Teacher spread0.276 · 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 designNon-randomized trial
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

Citations15
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSexually Transmitted InfectionsSame topicReproductive tract infections researchFrench-language works237,207