P473 Epidemiology of<i>Chlamydia trachomatis</i>in ontario and implications for changes to practice guidelines
Bibliographic record
Abstract
<h3>Background</h3> Similar to other regions, CT remains the most common reportable infection among teenagers and young adults in Niagara. Females, in general, have higher reported incidence than males; however, this may be at least partially due to their higher health seeking behavior. Most guidelines recommend annual screening of young women. Data supporting routine screening of men is limited. The objective of this study is to analyze and summarize the epidemiological data of chlamydial infections in Niagara Region and to provide support for routine testing of young men. <h3>Methods</h3> We extracted CT data and the number of CT tests from the provincial databases. Using SaTScan, we examined spatiotemporal clusters of CT within Niagara Region. We examined how the rates of CT differed by deprivation index using ON-MARG. <h3>Results</h3> The incidence of chlamydia in Niagara Region was higher in females with rates of 2535 and 2772 per 100,000 in 15–19 and 20–24 years old, respectively, in 2018. Likewise, rates of 811 and 1691 per 100,000 were seen in males aged 15–19 and 20–24, respectively. We also saw 12% and 9% of CT test positivity in females in these age groups during 2018. For males, 12% and 12% of tests were positive that year. We estimated that screening uptake was 12% and 14% among females, and 4% and 8% among males aged 15–19 and 20–24 in 2018. There was also a gradient of CT rates by ON-MARG quintile, indicating that those with lower SES had higher rates of CT. We also observed a large cluster of CT infection in the vicinity of a local post-secondary instituation. <h3>Conclusion</h3> There is a need for gender-neutral screening guidelines and changes to the primary care practices to increase routine screening of CT among young males, along with targeted interventions based on the local epidemiology, to curb the epidemic of CT. <h3>Disclosure</h3> No significant relationships.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".