MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2943055301 · doi:10.1177/2324709619842901

Erosive Vulvovaginitis Associated With <i>Borrelia burgdorferi</i> Infection

2019· article· en· W2943055301 on OpenAlexaff
Melissa C. Fesler, Marianne J. Middelveen, Jennie Burke, Raphael B. Stricker

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Investigative Medicine High Impact Case Reports · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGenital Health and Disease
Canadian institutionsCalgary Laboratory Services
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBorrelia burgdorferiSpirochaetaceaeLyme diseaseBorrelia Burgdorferi InfectionLesionPathologyPolymerase chain reactionMedicineBiologyVirologyImmunologyAntibody

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

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 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)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.031
Threshold uncertainty score0.880

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.307
Teacher spread0.281 · 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

Citations8
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Investigative Medicine High Impact Case ReportsSame topicGenital Health and DiseaseFrench-language works237,207