MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4322754757 · doi:10.1016/j.cmi.2023.02.015

Sensitivity and specificity of two investigational Point of care tests for Syphilis and HIV (PoSH Study) for the diagnosis and treatment of infectious syphilis in Canada: a cross-sectional study

2023· article· en· W4322754757 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Ameeta E. Singh, Noel Ives, Jennifer Gratrix, Carla Vetland, Leslie Ferron, Megan Crawford, Lisa Hale-Balla, Kathryn Dong, Garret Meyer, Petra Smyczek, Rick Galli, Sean B. Rourke, Kevin Fonseca

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Microbiology and Infection · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSyphilis Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsProvincial Laboratory of Public HealthAlberta Health ServicesSt. Michael's HospitalUniversity of Alberta
FundersIndigenous Services CanadaCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchCanadian Foundation for AIDS ResearchAlberta Health Services
KeywordsMedicineSyphilisPoint-of-care testingRapid plasma reaginFingerstickInternal medicineSerologyCross-sectional studyHuman immunodeficiency virus (HIV)ImmunologyAntibodyTreponemaPathologyDiabetes mellitus

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: Single-visit testing and treatment for syphilis can reduce follow-up visits. The objectives of this study were to evaluate the performance and treatment outcomes of two dual syphilis/HIV point-of-care tests (POCTs). METHODS: Participants aged 16 years and older were offered concurrent syphilis/HIV POCTs with fingerstick blood sampling using two extremely rapid (<5 minutes) devices (MedMira Multiplo Rapid TP/HIV test and INSTI Multiplex HIV-1/HIV-2/Syphilis Antibody Test). Those with positive POCT results were offered same-day syphilis treatment and linkage to HIV care. Nurses performed testing at two emergency departments, a First Nations community, a correctional facility, and a sexually transmitted infection clinic. POCT results were compared with those of standard serological testing. Sensitivity and specificity were calculated. RESULTS: Between August 2020 and February 2022, 1526 visits were completed. Both POCTs accurately identified participants with HIV (sensitivity, 100% [24 of 24]; 95% CI, 86.2-100%; specificity, 99.6% [1319 of 1324]; 95% CI, 99.1-99.8%), linking 24 HIV cases to care. Both tests were most sensitive with a rapid plasma reagin (RPR) of ≥1:8 dilutions (Multiplo: sensitivity, 98.3% [231 of 235]; 95% CI, 95.7-99.3%; specificity, 99.5% [871 of 875]; 95% CI, 98.8-99.8%; INSTI Multiplex: sensitivity, 97.9% [230 of 235]; 95% CI, 95.1-99.1%; specificity, 99.8% [873 of 875]; 95% CI, 99.2-99.9%) and least sensitive with non-reactive RPR (Multiplo: sensitivity, 54.1% [59 of 109]; 95% CI, 44.8-63.2%; specificity, 99.5% [871 of 875]; 95% CI, 98.8-99.8%; INSTI Multiplex: sensitivity, 28.4% [31 of 109]; 95% CI, 20.8-37.5%; specificity, 99.8% [873 of 875]; 95% CI, 99.2-99.9%). Eighty-five percent of participants with infectious syphilis were treated on the same day as the positive POCT result. DISCUSSION: Two extremely rapid (<5 minutes) dual syphilis/HIV POCTs showed excellent sensitivity and specificity for the diagnosis of active syphilis (RPR, ≥1:8 dilutions) and HIV and confirmed the ability to offer single-visit testing and treatment for syphilis and linkage to HIV care in diverse clinical settings.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.443
Threshold uncertainty score0.922

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.088
GPT teacher head0.384
Teacher spread0.296 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations21
Published2023
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClinical Microbiology and InfectionSame topicSyphilis Diagnosis and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207