MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2945604947 · doi:10.2196/13625

Pathology Laboratory Surveillance in the Australian Collaboration for Coordinated Enhanced Sentinel Surveillance of Sexually Transmitted Infections and Blood-Borne Viruses: Protocol for a Cohort Study

2019· article· en· W2945604947 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Caroline van Gemert, Rebecca Guy, Mark Stoové, Wayne Dimech, Carol El‐Hayek, Jason Asselin, Clarissa Moreira, Long Nguyen, Denton Callander, Douglas Boyle, Basil Donovan, Margaret Hellard

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Research Protocols · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicReproductive tract infections research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMedical Research CouncilNSW Ministry of HealthNational Health and Medical Research CouncilDepartment of Health, State Government of VictoriaAustralian GovernmentUniversity of New South WalesBurnet InstituteU.S. Department of Health and Human Services
KeywordsMedicineCohortPublic health surveillanceDisease surveillanceMedical emergencyChlamydiaElectronic surveillanceChlamydial infectionPublic healthPathologyFamily medicineImmunologyInternet privacyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Passive surveillance is the principal method of sexually transmitted infection (STI) and blood-borne virus (BBV) surveillance in Australia whereby positive cases of select STIs and BBVs are notified to the state and territory health departments. A major limitation of passive surveillance is that it only collects information on positive cases and notifications are heavily dependent on testing patterns. Denominator testing data are important in the interpretation of notifications. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study is to establish a national pathology laboratory surveillance system, part of a larger national sentinel surveillance system called ACCESS (the Australian Collaboration for Coordinated Enhanced Sentinel Surveillance). ACCESS is designed to utilize denominator testing data to understand trends in case reporting and monitor the uptake and outcomes of testing for STIs and BBVs. METHODS: ACCESS involves a range of clinical sites and pathology laboratories, each with a separate method of recruitment, data extraction, and data processing. This paper includes pathology laboratory sites only. First established in 2007 for chlamydia only, ACCESS expanded in 2012 to capture all diagnostic and clinical monitoring tests for STIs and BBVs, initially from pathology laboratories in New South Wales and Victoria, Australia, to at least one public and one private pathology laboratory in all Australian states and territories in 2016. The pathology laboratory sentinel surveillance system incorporates a longitudinal cohort design whereby all diagnostic and clinical monitoring tests for STIs and BBVs are collated from participating pathology laboratories in a line-listed format. An anonymous, unique identifier will be created to link patient data within and between participating pathology laboratory databases and to clinical services databases. Using electronically extracted, line-listed data, several indicators for each STI and BBV can be calculated, including the number of tests, unique number of individuals tested and retested, test yield, positivity, and incidence. RESULTS: To date, over 20 million STI and BBV laboratory test records have been extracted for analysis for surveillance monitoring nationally. Recruitment of laboratories is ongoing to ensure appropriate coverage for each state and territory; reporting of indicators will occur in 2019 with publication to follow. CONCLUSIONS: The ACCESS pathology laboratory sentinel surveillance network is a unique surveillance system that collects data on diagnostic testing, management, and care for and of STIs and BBVs. It complements the ACCESS clinical network and enhances Australia's capacity to respond to STIs and BBVs. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/13625.

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)0.084
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.061
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.084
Threshold uncertainty score0.445

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0840.061
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.004
Bibliometrics0.0040.005
Science and technology studies0.0050.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0040.004
Research integrity0.0030.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0370.010

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 head0.088
GPT teacher head0.487
Teacher spread0.399 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreProtocol

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

Citations2
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Research ProtocolsSame topicReproductive tract infections researchFrench-language works237,207