Reinfection With Cytomegalovirus During Pregnancy: A Prospective Cohort Study in Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Congenital cytomegalovirus infections (cCMV) are an important cause of childhood neurodevelopmental deficits. Most cCMV are the result of maternal non-primary infections during pregnancy, which can be due to reactivation or reinfection. To identify the rate of CMV reinfection during pregnancy and its risk factors. We performed a secondary analysis of CMV seropositive participants from two prospective cohort studies in Quebec, Canada. Antibody responses to four strain-specific CMV epitopes located in glycoproteins B and H were measured by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay. CMV reinfection was defined as the appearance of an antibody response to a new epitope in the third compared to the first trimester. Risk factors for reinfection were assessed. Among 1614 participants, CMV reinfection was identified in 2.7% of participants, representing an incidence of 54.99 per 1000 person-years at risk (95% confidence interval 39.95-73.82). Age, marital status, household income, continent of birth or ethnicity were not associated with reinfection during pregnancy. The incidence of CMV reinfection during pregnancy is like what has been reported for primary infection in Quebec. A greater understanding of the patterns of reinfection is needed to inform strategies to reduce the burden of disease from cCMV.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".