P416 Screening Rates and Follow-up of Chlamydia trachomatis and Neisseria gonorrhoeae Infections During Pregnancy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction Doubts concerning the efficacity of prophylactic ocular topic antibiotics on newborns for prevention of ophtalmia neonatorum (ON) and its decreasing incidence lead the Canadian Pediatric Society to no longer recommend its systematic use. They rather recommend that prevention of ON should focus on systematic prenatal screening of Chlamydia trachomatis (CT) and Neisseria gonorrhoeae (NG) and treatment of infected women and their partners. This study’s primary endpoint was to evaluate compliance with Quebec’s provincial pregnancy screening, test of cure (TOC) and re-screening guidelines. Methods Charts of all women who delivered at the Centre hospitalier de l’Université de Montréal, a tertiary care hospital in Montreal, between April 1st, 2018 and March 31st, 2019 were reviewed to assess demographic, clinical and laboratory data. Results Among 2557 women, 2481 (97.0%) were screened for CT/NG at least once during pregnancy. For 2278 women (89.1%) a laboratory report was retrievable for analysis. CT infection was detected in 20/2278 women (0,88%) whose mean age was 33 years old (range from 18 to 39). Treatment was appropriate according to guidelines in 18 (90%), a test of cure (TOC) was performed in 18 (90%), and re-screening between 3 and 6 months after diagnosis was done in 14 women (70%). Treatment of sexual partners was documented for 16 women (80%). The only NG infection detected (0,04%) was wrongly interpreted as a false positive; no treatment was administered. Conclusion The proportion of pregnant women with at least one available CT/NG test result compares favorably to screening rates in other Canadian studies. However, the proportion of CT infected women for whom a TOC and re-screening was performed needs to be improved. The interpretation of positive NG tests in pregnant women and documentation of sexual partners management of infected women also needs improvement.
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 | 0.005 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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".