Erosive Vulvovaginitis Associated With <i>Borrelia burgdorferi</i> Infection
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We describe a case of acute erosive vulvovaginitis accompanying Borrelia burgdorferi infection. The patient is a 57-year-old woman previously diagnosed with Lyme disease who presented with a painful erosive genital lesion. At the time of the outbreak, she was being treated with oral antibiotics, and she tested serologically positive for B burgdorferi and serologically negative for syphilis. Histological examination of biopsy tissue from the lesion was not characteristic of dermatopathological patterns typical of erosive vulvar conditions. Dieterle-stained biopsy sections revealed visible spirochetes throughout the stratum spinosum and stratum basale, and anti- B burgdorferi immunostaining was positive. Motile spirochetes were observed by darkfield microscopy and cultured in Barbour-Stoner-Kelly-complete medium inoculated with skin scrapings from the lesion. Cultured spirochetes were identified genetically as B burgdorferi sensu stricto by polymerase chain reaction, while polymerase chain reaction amplification of treponemal gene targets was negative. The condition resolved after treatment with additional systemic antibiotic therapy and topical antibiotics. In cases of genital ulceration that have no identifiable etiology, the possibility of B burgdorferi spirochetal infection should be considered.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
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".