MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4309749684 · doi:10.2147/rru.s381191

Male Sexual Health Implications of the 2022 Global Monkeypox Outbreak

2022· review· en· W4309749684 on OpenAlexaff
Joshua White, Marco‐Jose Rivero, Arslan I Mohamed, Jamie Thomas, Akhil Muthigi, Farah Rahman, Jesse Ory, Francis Petrella, Ranjith Ramasamy

Bibliographic record

VenueResearch and Reports in Urology · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicPoxvirus research and outbreaks
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityDalhousie University
FundersNational Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases
KeywordsMonkeypoxOutbreakMedicineSmallpoxEpidemiologyReproductive healthPublic healthOrthopoxvirusMen who have sex with menDemographyTransmission (telecommunications)Environmental healthHuman immunodeficiency virus (HIV)VirologyVaccinationPathologyPopulationVacciniaSyphilisBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The 2022 global monkeypox (MPX) outbreak is the largest in history to occur outside of endemic African regions. Disease spread during this outbreak has been primarily through human-to-human transmission, with sexual contact being of particular concern. Clinical presentations have commonly featured genital, perianal, and oral lesions associated with sexual activity among men who have sex with men (MSM), who compose the vast majority of MPX cases. This review discusses the epidemiology, clinical features, and evaluation of MPX with regards to men's sexual health. Comparisons were made between MPX and its relative from the Orthopoxvirus genus, smallpox, in order to make informed inferences on the potential effects of MPX on men's sexual health. This review also discusses the role of men's health specialists and urologists in addressing the current outbreak.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesResearch integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.961
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.113
GPT teacher head0.425
Teacher spread0.312 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations4
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueResearch and Reports in UrologySame topicPoxvirus research and outbreaksFrench-language works237,207