P387 STI incidence after STI treatment among women at risk for HIV exposure initiating safer conception care in southwestern Uganda
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background Sexually transmitted infection (STI) recurrence contributes to the high global STI burden. We introduced STI screening and facilitated partner notification (PN) and treatment among women participating in a safer conception study in southwestern Uganda to understand impacts on STI incidence. Methods A parent study enrolled women planning for pregnancy with a man with HIV or of unknown serostatus to assess pre-exposure prophylaxis use for safer conception. STI screening began after study-start, and all eligible women completed screening for chlamydia, gonorrhea, and trichomoniasis via GeneXpert nucleic acid amplification testing and syphilis via immunochromatographic testing and rapid plasma reagin. Multivariable Poisson regression was used to determine incident STI correlates. Results Of 134 women in the parent study, 94 underwent enrollment STI screening, of whom 23 were positive. Median age was 31 (IQR 28–35) years. All participants with STIs received counseling and treatment; 21/23 participants accepted PN cards and 18/23 accepted patient-delivered partner medications. By the six-month study-visit, 81 participants repeated STI testing (N=66 at that visit, N=15 at incident pregnancy visit; whichever came first); 13 participants were lost to follow-up. Of those with enrollment STIs, 19/23 returned for follow-up at six months; 18 reported delivering PN cards and discussing STIs with partner(s) and 14 reported medication delivery to partner(s). Incident STIs occurred in 17/81 participants with 42.57 person-years of follow-up (incidence rate 40/100 person-years). STI incidence was associated with enrollment STI (incidence rate ratio [IRR] 3.39, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.22–9.43) and alcohol consumption (IRR 3.18, 95% CI 1.15–8.85). Conclusions We demonstrate a high STI prevalence and incidence among women planning for pregnancy in Uganda despite partner treatment promotion efforts. These infections are likely driven in part by re-infection from untreated partners. Novel STI PN interventions are needed to decrease the STI burden, especially among women planning for and with pregnancy.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".