MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3044007413 · doi:10.1097/olq.0000000000001247

Pregnancies and Time to Pregnancy in Women With and Without a Previous Chlamydia trachomatis Infection

2020· article· en· W3044007413 on OpenAlexaff
Bernice M. Hoenderboom, Jan van Bergen, Nicole H. T. M. Dukers–Muijrers, Hannelore M Götz, Christian J. P. A. Hoebe, Henry J.C. de Vries, I V F van den Broek, Frank de Vries, Jolande A. Land, Marianne A. B. van der Sande, Servaas A. Morré, Birgit van Benthem

Bibliographic record

VenueSexually Transmitted Diseases · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicReproductive tract infections research
Canadian institutionsInstitute of Infection and Immunity
FundersZonMw
KeywordsChlamydiaMedicineChlamydia trachomatisPregnancyObstetricsGynecologyTubal factor infertilityInfertilityMiscarriageCohort studyCohortInternal medicineImmunologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: A Chlamydia trachomatis infection (chlamydia) can result in tubal factor infertility in women. To assess if this association results in fewer pregnant women, we aimed to assess pregnancy incidences and time to pregnancy among women with a previous chlamydia infection compared with women without one and who were participating in the Netherlands Chlamydia Cohort Study (NECCST). METHODS: The NECCST is a cohort of women of reproductive age tested for chlamydia in a chlamydia screening trial between 2008 and 2011 and reinvited for NECCST in 2015 to 2016. Chlamydia status (positive/negative) was defined using chlamydia screening trial-nucleic acid amplification test results, chlamydia immunoglobulin G presence in serum, or self-reported chlamydia infections. Data on pregnancies were collected via questionnaires in 2015-2016 and 2017-2018. Overall pregnancies (i.e., planned and unplanned) and time to pregnancy (among women with a pregnancy intention) were compared between chlamydia-positive and chlamydia-negative women using Cox regressions. RESULTS: Of 5704 women enrolled, 1717 (30.1%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 28.9-31.3) women was chlamydia positive. Overall pregnancy proportions were similar in chlamydia-positive and chlamydia-negative women (49.0% [95% CI, 46.5-51.4] versus 50.5% [95% CI, 48.9-52.0]). Pregnancies per 1000 person-years were 53.2 (95% CI, 51.5-55.0) for chlamydia negatives and 83.0 (95% CI, 78.5-87.9) for chlamydia positives. Among women with a pregnancy intention, 12% of chlamydia-positive women had a time to pregnancy of >12 months compared with 8% of chlamydia negatives (P < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Overall pregnancy rates were not lower in chlamydia-positive women compared with chlamydia-negative women, but among women with a pregnancy intention, time to pregnancy was longer and pregnancy rates were lower in chlamydia-positive women. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: Dutch Trial Register NTR-5597.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.029

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.246
Teacher spread0.235 · 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
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

Citations21
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSexually Transmitted DiseasesSame topicReproductive tract infections researchFrench-language works237,207