clinical challenge ❖ défi clinique MOTHERISK UPDATE Ever y year, the Centre forInfectious Disease Prevention
Bibliographic record
Abstract
there were 1111 positive HIV test reports in Canada; 204 concerned adult women.2 One third of these women contracted the primary infec-tion through heterosexual exposure.3 In the past, many HIV-infected pregnant women were unaware of their HIV status, and their infection was undetected until either they or their children devel-oped symptoms. It is cur-rently recommended that all pregnant women be offered an HIV screening test as part of their prenatal care. The HIV test is performed only after counseling and obtaining informed consent.4 Human immunodeficiency virus can be transmitted from mother to child during gestation and delivery or through breast milk. The rate of transmission of HIV from mother to child during pregnancy without inter vention ranges between 15% and 40%; the rate with optimal ARV management is 1 % to 3%.5 Testing for HIV during pregnancy provides an important opportunity for starting ARV treatment if necessary. Therapy for the mother reduces the risk of HIV transmission to her child. While zidovudine monotherapy was initially the most frequently prescribed regimen, combination therapy is now more common. Combinations are either two nucleo-side reverse transcriptase inhibitors (NRTIs), such as zidovudine and lamivudine, or two NRTIs with a protease inhibitor. In Canada, the cur-rently licensed ARV agents are the NR TIs abacavir, didanosine, lamivudine, stavudine, zalcitabine, and zidovudine; the non-nucleo-side reverse transcriptase Do you have questions about the safety of drugs, chemicals,radiation, or infections in women who are pregnant or
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 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.097 | 0.042 |
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".