MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

A comprehensive review on prevalence and its adverse outcome of Chlamydia trachomatis on female genital tract

2024· review· en· W4392772672 on OpenAlexaff
Taniqsha Bambani, Ananya Srivastava, Sahina Saif, Noopur Ramesh Kedia

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Reproduction Contraception Obstetrics and Gynecology · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCervical Cancer and HPV Research
Canadian institutionsASTER
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChlamydia trachomatisFemale circumcisionGenital tractChlamydiaMedicineSex organGynecologyBiologyPhysiologyImmunology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

One of the most prevalent bacterial infections acquired through sexual contact is Chlamydia trachomatis. The age group of 16-19 years old (young sexually active individuals) is where females are most susceptible to contracting this virus. Most of the time they are asymptomatic, but if they are not treated, they might have serious side effects including pelvic inflammatory disease (PID). Chylamdia can be diagnosed using a variety of diagnostic methods; however, recent groundbreaking research using NAAT has made the diagnosis and treatment of the condition two times simpler. Key words such as ‘chlamydia,’ ‘pelvic inflammatory disease’ ‘cervicitis,’ ‘sexually transmitted infection,’ ‘vaginal discharge’ were used in a systematic search of the electronic databases PubMed, Embase, LitCovid, MedRxiv, BioRxiv, Google Scholar, EBSCO MEDLINE, CINAHL, and Scopus to find studies published between January 2009 and December 2023. Overall, this review helps to clarify the effects of Chylamdia on the female reproductive system, which in turn helps to clarify some of the problems and basic care associated with it. In general, the review's goal is to shield the public from serious health problems and make them more equipped to deal with them in case they acquire them.

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)0.007
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.967
Threshold uncertainty score0.895

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.107
GPT teacher head0.430
Teacher spread0.323 · 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 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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Reproduction Contraception Obstetrics and GynecologySame topicCervical Cancer and HPV ResearchFrench-language works237,207