Ocular syphilis in an immunocompetent man
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A healthy 47-year-old immunocompetent man from Northern Canada presented for ophthalmologic assessment after experiencing one month of right-sided photopsias, floaters, and a right lower nasal quadrant visual field defect. Optic disc swelling, vitritis, chorioretinitis, peripheral retinal infiltrates and hemorrhages were noted in the right eye. A broad right inferior arcuate and nasal visual field defect were also present. Fluorescein angiography of the right retina showed dilated disc vessels and staining of the optic disc. Treponemal antibody testing, using chemiluminescent microparticle immunoassay, was highly positive; this was followed by a Venereal Disease Research Laboratory (VDRL) test with a titre of 1:32 and confirmed by Treponema pallidum particle agglutination (TP-PA) test. Testing did not demonstrate any co-infections. Cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) analysis revealed strong reactivity (4+) to the Treponemal antibody by immunofluorescence antibody absorbed (FTA-ABS) test and non-reactivity by CSF VDRL test. Syphilis PCR of CSF was negative. A diagnosis of neurosyphilis was made. He was treated with ceftriaxone 2 grams IV q24h for 14 days. The vitritis gradually improved. Familiarity with syphilis diagnostics is becoming increasingly important, especially given its recent resurgence amongst several at risk groups. This patient's case highlights that non-reactive CSF VDRL is not a reliable test in the context of positive serum results and a compatible clinical picture. CSF Treponemal tests such as TP-PA and FTA-ABS offer higher sensitivity than non-treponemal tests such as VDRL in the context of CNS involvement and ocular syphilis.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".