MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2792825183 · doi:10.1177/0956462417751813

Asymptomatic urethral lymphogranuloma venereum: a case report

2018· article· en· W2792825183 on OpenAlexaffabout
Louise Charest, Judith Fafard, Zoë R. Greenwald

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of STD & AIDS · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicReproductive tract infections research
Canadian institutionsCentre intégré de santé et de services sociaux de Chaudière-Appalaches
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLymphogranuloma venereumMedicineChlamydia trachomatisProctitisMen who have sex with menAsymptomaticChlamydiaIncidence (geometry)DermatologyNeisseria gonorrhoeaeInguinal lymphadenopathyGenotypeInternal medicineGynecologyVirologyImmunologyDiseaseHuman immunodeficiency virus (HIV)SyphilisMicrobiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Since 2003, there has been a resurgence of lymphogranuloma venereum (LGV), a variant of Chlamydia trachomatis (CT), among men who have sex with men (MSM) in several urban areas of Europe and North America. LGV infection occurs most often at anal sites causing proctitis. Urethral and oropharyngeal infections are rare. In Quebec, LGV incidence has been increasing exponentially in recent years and the current guidelines support systematic LGV genotype testing among anorectal CT-positive samples only. This case report describes a patient with a urethral LGV infection, remarkable due to its prolonged asymptomatic development prior to the manifestation of an inguinal bubo. Physicians should be vigilant of potential cases of LGV and forward CT-positive samples occurring among individuals with LGV risk factors for genotype testing.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Case report · Consensus signal: Case report
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0050.003
Science and technology studies0.0040.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.004
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0080.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.341
Teacher spread0.322 · 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 designCase report
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

Citations4
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of STD & AIDSSame topicReproductive tract infections researchFrench-language works237,207