MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4416769207 · doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2025-103674

Prevalence of sexually transmitted infections among military personnel: a systematic review protocol

2025· review· en· W4416769207 on OpenAlexafffund
Esther S. Shoemaker, Emma Sandström, Cody Daniel Dangerfield, Janice Linton, François Cholette, Leigh M. McClarty, Lisa Lazarus, Nicole Herpai, Daria Pavlova, Michael Pickles, Marissa Becker

Bibliographic record

VenueBMJ Open · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicReproductive tract infections research
Canadian institutionsPublic Health Agency of CanadaUniversity of ManitobaManitoba Health
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsProtocol (science)EpidemiologyPublic healthMilitary personnelMEDLINEHealth services research

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Military personnel are a unique population with heightened vulnerability to sexually transmitted infections (STIs), often exhibiting higher prevalence rates than civilians due to demographic, environmental and occupational factors. These vulnerabilities underscore the need for global prevalence estimates to guide effective, evidence-based interventions. This study aims to quantify the global burden of STIs among military personnel, providing a comprehensive and up-to-date assessment. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This systematic review will follow the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Guidelines (2020). Using the CoCoPop (Condition, Context, and Population) framework, a comprehensive search strategy will be conducted in MEDLINE, Embase, Global Health and Scopus to retrieve peer-reviewed records published between January 2010 and June 2025. Eligible studies will report numerical STI prevalence data among military personnel. Studies with insufficient information to calculate prevalence or those relying on self-reported STI data will be excluded. Data extraction will include study details, military descriptors, STI prevalence and diagnostic methods. Risk of bias will be assessed using the Joanna Briggs Institute critical assessment tool for prevalence and incidence studies. Prevalence estimates with 95% CIs will be reported for each STI and, where appropriate, pooled for curable STIs. Subgroup analyses will stratify prevalence by geographic region, service status, deployment status and socioeconomic factors. Heterogeneity will be evaluated within predefined subgroups using the I² statistic. Data will be presented in comprehensive tables and visualised with graphical tools, including forest plots for subgroup analyses and pooled estimates. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval is not required for this review. The results will be disseminated through a peer-reviewed publication and conference presentations. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42023472113.

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)0.065
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.060
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.069
Threshold uncertainty score0.345

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0650.060
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0060.006
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0220.015
Bibliometrics0.0170.014
Science and technology studies0.0040.005
Scholarly communication0.0070.009
Open science0.0060.005
Research integrity0.0080.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0690.009

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 head0.079
GPT teacher head0.461
Teacher spread0.382 · 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 designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreProtocol

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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMJ Open→Same topicReproductive tract infections research→French-language works237,207→