Transmission of gonorrhea from the oral cavity to the rectal tract: A systematic review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background The antimicrobial resistance of Neisseria gonorrhoeae and the high prevalence of asymptomatic extragenital infections are a worldwide concern. This research investigated whether gonorrhea can be transmitted from the oral cavity to the anorectal tract among men who have sex with men. Purpose The aim of this research is to find plausible relationships regarding the probability of gonococcal transmission from the oral cavity to the anorectal tract among MSM. Research Design A research question was defined using the P.I.C.O. strategy (population, intervention or exposure, comparison and outcome), where the target population is MSM, the intervention is exposure to contaminated oral cavity/saliva, the control is the absence of exposure, and the outcome is the acquisition of GC. The eligibility criteria included observational studies involving men who have sex with men, regardless of sexual orientation, aged 16 or older, screened for oropharyngeal and rectal gonorrhea, and examining the role of oral fluids in transmission. Studies involving partners previously diagnosed with urogenital gonorrhea or reporting consistent condom use during receptive penoanal sex were excluded to avoid urethral-to-anorectal transmission bias. Study Sample The databases employed were PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, EBSCO, SciELO, and the Virtual Health Library (VHL). A total of 383 studies were identified, however, only 6 were included. Data Collection and/or Analysis According to the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS), two studies were “very good,” two “good,” and two “satisfactory”. Most studies described a complete methodology according to Strengthening the Reporting of Observational studies in Epidemiology (STROBE). Results Differences in diagnostic methods, methodologies, and variables limited the findings. While the results do not confirm transmission from the oral cavity to the anorectal tract, they suggest its possibility. Further research is needed to better understand this transmission route. Conclusions Transmissibility of gonorrhea from oropharyngeal via to the anorectal tract cannot be totally establish. However, evidence suggested the existence of this gonorrhea transmission. The fact that men with rectal gonorrhea continue to appear, even in contexts of condom use or the absence of receptive penoanal sex, brings the importance of cases monitoring and the establishment of preventive strategies.
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 | 0.006 | 0.028 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.008 | 0.005 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.011 | 0.014 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".