MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7009514743

Epidemiology of sexually transmitted human papillomavirus infection in young females and their sequential male partners

2023· dissertation· en· W7009514743 on OpenAlexfundno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueeScholarship@McGill (McGill) · 2023
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicElectoral Systems and Political Participation
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMcGill University
KeywordsEpidemiologyHuman papillomavirusIncidence (geometry)DiseaseSexually transmitted diseaseYoung adult
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: The etiologic role of human papillomavirus (HPV) infections in cervical cancer is well established.Secondary cervical cancer prevention requires a detailed understanding of vaginal HPV infection natural history.Characterizing HPV transmission from previous sexual relationships to subsequent sex partners may have implications for primary HPV-related cancer prevention.Objectives: Manuscript 1 examines detection and clearance rates for vaginal HPV infections among females in new heterosexual relationships.Manuscript 2 characterizes type-specific HPV positivity between sequential male partners of the same female.Methods: Genital HPV genotyping and sexual behaviour data were collected on recently-paired Montréal couples in the HPV Infection and Transmission among Couples through Heterosexual activity (HITCH) prospective cohort study.Females provided vaginal samples at 0-, 4-, 8-, 12-, 18-and 24-months, while males provided scrotal and penile samples at 0-and 4-months.Data from 501 women (aged 18-24) were analyzed in Manuscript 1; time-to-event statistics for detection and clearance of HPV infections were calculated at the woman-and HPV-levels using Kaplan-Meier analysis and rates.Data from 42 female-linked sequential partnerships (42 male 1-42 female-42 male 2) were used in Manuscript 2; 1,512 detectable HPV infections were analyzed.Observed/expected ratios for infection concordance between males 1 and 2 were calculated.Using mixed-effects regression, odds ratios (ORs) for male 2 testing positive for the same HPV type as male 1 were estimated.95% confidence intervals are provided in parentheses.Analyses were performed for any HPV type and by subgenera of the Alphapapillomavirus genus.Subgenus 1 includes low oncogenic risk HPV types, subgenus 2 high oncogenic risk types, and subgenus 3 commensal types. II Results:In Manuscript 1, by 24 months, one or more incident HPV infections were detected in 40.4% (33.4-48.4) of women.Incident subgenera 1, 2 and 3 infections cleared at comparable rates per 1000 infection-months: 43.4 (33.6-56.4),47.1 (39.9-55.5)and 46.6 (37.7-57.7),respectively.In Manuscript 2, detection of the same HPV type in males 1 and 2 occurred 2.6 (1.9-3.5)times more often than chance.The OR for male 2 positivity was 4.2 (2.5-7.0).Adjusting for the number of times the linking female partner tested positive for the same HPV type attenuated the relationship between male 1 and 2 positivity.Discussion: In Manuscript 1, HPV-level analyses did not clearly indicate that oncogenic subgenus 2 infections take longer to clear than low oncogenic-risk subgenera 1 and 3 infections.In Manuscript 2, type-specific HPV positivity in males 1 and 2 was not independent.OR estimates suggested mediation by the number of times the female tested positive; infections were likely transmitted to male 2 via the female.Conclusions: Type-specific estimates of HPV infection natural history can provide biologically informed parameters for cervical screening.HPV positivity in male 1-female partnerships predicted positivity in male 2 when the linking female partner was persistently positive.Vaccinating males may therefore prevent HPV infection in unvaccinated ordinal sexual connections.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.029
Threshold uncertainty score0.058

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.102
GPT teacher head0.388
Teacher spread0.286 · 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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueeScholarship@McGill (McGill)→Same topicElectoral Systems and Political Participation→French-language works237,207→