MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2943722073 · doi:10.1177/1744987119843152

Express testing for sexually transmitted infections: clinical results

2019· article· en· W2943722073 on OpenAlexaff
Patrick O’Byrne, Lauren Orser

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of research in nursing · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicReproductive tract infections research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineIntensive care medicinePsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Many sexually transmitted infection (STI) clinics are becoming unable to meet increases in service demand. AIMS: To address increased service delivery demand at our STI clinic, we implemented express testing, which involved self-assessment and visitation with a nurse who performed specimen collection but no examination. METHODS: Patient consent was obtained and chart review occurred. RESULTS: = 1295/1427) of these patients agreeing to use it. We identified 62 infections (all gonorrhoea and chlamydia) among the 1295 patients who used express. In streamlining care provision, express testing enabled us to see 334 more patients, among whom we identified an additional 27 infections (four patients with infectious syphilis, 23 with gonorrhoea or chlamydia). CONCLUSION: Our results support the expanded use of express 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 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)0.015
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Research integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.415
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0150.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
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 head0.160
GPT teacher head0.502
Teacher spread0.342 · 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.

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

Citations5
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of research in nursingSame topicReproductive tract infections researchFrench-language works237,207