MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4398134432 · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0302785

Testing for extragenital Neisseria gonorrhoeae and Chlamydia trachomatis: At-home pharyngeal and rectal self-swabs are non-inferior to those completed in healthcare settings

2024· article· en· W4398134432 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Lauren Orser, Vanessa Tran, Patrick O’Byrne, Abigail Kroch, Melissa Bonnetsmueller, Maan Hasso, Alexandra Musten

Bibliographic record

VenuePLoS ONE · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicReproductive tract infections research
Canadian institutionsPublic Health OntarioUniversity of TorontoOttawa Public HealthOntario HIV Treatment NetworkUniversity of Ottawa
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchOntario HIV Treatment NetworkUniversity of Ottawa
KeywordsNeisseria gonorrhoeaeChlamydia trachomatisChlamydiaGonorrheaMedicinePharynxMicrobiologyGynecologyBiologyVirologyImmunologySurgeryHuman immunodeficiency virus (HIV)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: The rates of gonorrhea and chlamydia have been increasing in the years preceding the COVID19 pandemic. Because most gonorrhea and chlamydia infections are located in the oropharynx and rectum for men who have sex with men (MSM), and because at-home self-collected swabs for these infections are not licensed by Health Canada or the United States Food and Drug Administration, decreased accessed to in-person care during and since the COVID19 pandemic potentially means missed case findings. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the performance of at-home self-collected pharyngeal and rectal swabs for gonorrhea and chlamydia nucleic acid amplification testing. METHODOLOGY: All persons who contacted our Sexual Health Clinic and who had a clinical indication to complete oral and/or rectal swabs for gonorrhea and chlamydia were invited to complete at-home swabs in advance of their scheduled appointments. We mailed swabs and instructions to those who consented. Participants brought these swabs to their scheduled in clinic appointments, where we repeated the same swabs. All matching swabs were sent to the laboratory for analysis to determine concordance. RESULTS: From September 8, 2022 to July 18, 2023, we enrolled 296 eligible participants who provided 1184 swabs. For analysis, cancelled specimens and specimens with invalid results were excluded, leaving 1032 swabs for comparison. We identified 66 STI diagnoses in 47 unique participants. Overall accuracy was high (exceeding 99%), except for rectal chlamydia, which was 96.0%. While the performance of self-swabs for chlamydia was lower compared to gonorrhea, at-home swabs identified six chlamydia infections that were missed by in-clinic collected swabs (two pharyngeal, four rectal). Removing these six cases as "false positives" increased overall accuracy for chlamydia detection to 99.7% (pharyngeal) and 97.8% (rectal). CONCLUSION: Self-collected at-home swabs had good performance acceptable for gonorrhea and chlamydia nucleic acid amplification testing.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.024

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.056
GPT teacher head0.299
Teacher spread0.244 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations6
Published2024
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePLoS ONESame topicReproductive tract infections researchFrench-language works237,207