Prevalence of syphilis coinfection in hepatitis C virus positive prenatal patients from Alberta during a pilot routine screening program
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Alberta routinely screens pregnant patients for select communicable diseases. Hepatitis C virus (HCV) was added to the prenatal screening panel as part of a provincial pilot program in February 2020. This retrospective cross-sectional study aimed to characterize the prevalence of syphilis coinfections in prenatal patients infected with HCV following implementation of the pilot program. METHODS: Routine prenatal HCV and syphilis testing data were extracted from the Public Health Laboratory Information System over a 21-month period. HCV positivity was defined as HCV enzyme immunoassay (EIA) reactive with detected HCV ribonucleic acid (RNA) following molecular confirmation, and positive results were examined for syphilis coinfections. All patients reactive on a syphilis EIA and confirmatory Treponema pallidum particle agglutination (TPPA) or follow-up rapid plasma reagin (RPR) test were considered positive for syphilis. Descriptive statistics for coinfected patients were analyzed. RESULTS: Eighty-seven prenatal patients were identified to be positive for HCV. Of those, 19 (21.8%) were reactive on the syphilis EIA and 17 (19.5%) had confirmed infections with the TPPA or RPR tests. For HCV/syphilis coinfected patients, the majority resided in metropolitan regions (64.6%), were from the lowest income quintile neighbourhoods (47.1%) and had previously tested positive for HCV (82.4%) and syphilis (64.6%) at the public health laboratory. CONCLUSIONS: The prevalence of syphilis coinfections in prenatal patients infected with HCV is high in Alberta. HCV/syphilis coinfection prevalence should be further investigated in other jurisdictions and prenatal cohorts to better understand testing and treatment options for prevention of congenital transmission.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".