MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4417155951 · doi:10.64898/2025.12.05.25341711

Optimal deployment of gonorrhoea point-of-care tests: modelling the potential impact of diagnostic confirmation testing and screening strategies across five priority populations in Kenya

2025· article· W4417155951 on OpenAlexaff
Julia Michalow, Anne Cori, Joshua Kimani, Parinita Bhattacharjee, Marie‐Claude Boily, Jeffrey W. Eaton

Bibliographic record

VenuemedRxiv · 2025
Typearticle
Language
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicReproductive tract infections research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDiagnostic testAsymptomaticPopulationTransmission (telecommunications)Point-of-care testingIncidence (geometry)EpidemiologyPublic healthCase finding

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Gonorrhoea treatment in sub-Saharan Africa relies on syndromic management, which has poor diagnostic performance and misses asymptomatic infections. Point-of-care tests (POCTs) could address these limitations, but anticipated supply constraints necessitate strategic allocation to maximise impact. Methods We developed a deterministic compartmental model of gonorrhoea transmission in Kenya to evaluate allocating POCTs for diagnostic confirmation of symptomatic care attendees versus screening of routine healthcare service attendees across five priority populations: female sex workers (FSW), their male clients (CFSW), pregnant women, adolescent girls and young women, or total population men. We modelled constrained and unrestricted POCT availability during 2025-2030, and estimated infections averted relative to baseline syndromic management. Quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) gained were quantified using probability-tree models. Results At baseline, incidence was highest among FSW (11.9 [UI:5.7-18.6] per 100 per year) and CFSW (13.1 [6.9-24.8]), while most QALY losses (80.6% [76.1-83.8%]) were among pregnant women and their infants. With constrained POCTs (sufficient to test 0.1% of adults annually), diagnostic confirmation averted the most transmission when among symptomatic FSW (2.1% [0.6-5.6%] of infections) or CFSW (2.2% [0.8-5.3%]), but the most morbidity was averted when among symptomatic pregnant women (3.5% [1.8-7.2%] of QALY losses). Screening averted <1% of infections or QALY losses across populations. With unrestricted POCTs, screening had larger absolute impacts but lower per-test returns than diagnostic confirmation. Conclusions Diagnostic confirmation should be prioritised over screening, supporting WHO guidance to strengthen aetiologic diagnosis within syndromic management. Prioritising diagnostic testing among symptomatic pregnant women had the largest impact on mitigating gonorrhoea-related morbidity.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.149
Threshold uncertainty score0.297

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0030.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.365
Teacher spread0.320 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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