A fresh look at the role of spiramycin in preventing a neglected disease: meta-analyses of observational studies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: We aimed to investigate the effect of antepartum treatment with spiramycin with or without subsequent pyrimethamine-sulfonamide-folinic acid, compared to no treatment, on the rate of mother-to-child transmission (MTCT) of Toxoplasma gondii (T. gondii) and incidence/severity of sequelae in the offspring. METHODS: Embase and PubMed were searched for literature on spiramycin in pregnant women suspected/diagnosed with T. gondii infection. Meta-analyses were performed using random-effects model. RESULTS: Thirty-three studies (32 cohorts and 1 cross-sectional study), with a total of 15,406 mothers and 15,250 offspring, were pooled for analyses. The MTCT rate for all treated patients was significantly lower than the untreated [19.5% (95% CI 14-25.5%) versus 50.7% (95% CI 31.2-70%), p < 0.001]. The transmission rate in patients on spiramycin monotherapy was also significantly lower than untreated [17.6% (95% CI 9.9-26.8%) versus 50.7% (95% CI 31.2-70%), p < 0.001]. CONCLUSION: Results indicate significant reduction in MTCT rates following spiramycin treatment of suspected/diagnosed maternal T. gondii infection.
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 | 0.025 | 0.056 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.012 | 0.037 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".