P470 Screening rates and follow-up of<i>Chlamydia trachomatis</i>and<i>Neisseria gonorrhoeae</i>infections during pregnancy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background While the US Preventive Services Task Force recommends prophylactic ocular topical medication for all newborns to prevent gonococcal ophthalmia neonatorum, the Canadian pediatric society no longer recommends its use. Systematic prenatal screening for C. trachomatis (CT) and N. gonorrhoeae (NG), as well as treatment and test of cure (TOC) are considered the most effective ways of preventing vertical transmission and neonatal conjunctivitis. The aim of this study was to assess compliance with Quebec pregnancy screening guidelines. Methods The list of all women who delivered at a tertiary care hospital in Montreal, between April 2015 and March 2016, was cross-referenced with the list of samples tested for CT/NG. Maternal medical records were reviewed for demographic, prenatal and diagnostic information. Results Amongst 2688 women, 2256 were sampled at least once but only 2218 (82.5%) had at least one valid result available before the day of delivery. Screening rates leading to a valid result were higher among nulliparous women (86%; 1071/1243 vs 79%; 1138/1432; p<0.001) as well as in women <25 years old (yo) (86%; 298/347 vs 82%; 1920/2341; p=0.08). Infection was detected in 45/2218 (2%) women: CT (43; 1.9%) and NG (4; 0.2%); two were co-infected. CT infection was more frequent in women aged <25 yo (9.4%; 28/298) than among those aged ≥25 yo (0.8%; 15/1920; p<0.001). Amongst the 43 CT-infected women, 39 (91%) were treated and 31 (72%) had a TOC which was positive in four (13%) women. All NG-positive women were treated and had a negative TOC. Conclusion Compliance with CT/NG screening and follow-up guidelines is insufficient to stop current universal ocular prophylaxis. Repeating universal screening in pregnancy should be considered: in addition to identifying women who become infected later in pregnancy, such strategy could decrease the number of women who are not screened at all during pregnancy. Disclosure 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 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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 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".