Feasibility and Success of Hiv Point‐of‐Care Testing in an Emergency Department in an Urban Canadian Setting
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Approximately 26% of Canadians living with HIV are unaware of their status. Point-of-care (POC) HIV tests have been introduced to simplify and expand HIV testing. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the feasibility and acceptability of POC testing in an emergency department (ED) setting in Winnipeg, Manitoba. METHODS: A cross-sectional study of unselected adults presenting to the ED at the Health Sciences Centre Hospital (Winnipeg, Manitoba) was performed. Study procedures included pre- and post-test counselling, administration of the INSTI HIV-1/HIV-2 Antibody Test (bioLytical Laboratories, Canada) and a brief questionnaire. Venous blood samples were collected from participants for confirmatory testing on all reactive and indeterminate specimens. RESULTS: In total, 501 adults participated in the study. The majority of participants were younger than 40 years of age, approximately one-half (48.5%) were women and 53% self-identified as Aboriginal. Nearly one-half (49.1%) of the participants had undergone previous HIV testing, although 63% of these tests were performed more than a year earlier. A total of seven individuals tested reactive with the POC test, all of whom were confirmed positive using serological testing (1.4%) and were linked to an HIV specialist within 24 h. Nearly all of the participants (96%) reported satisfaction with the test and believed it belonged in the ED (93%). CONCLUSIONS: Of the participants tested, 1.4% tested reactive for HIV, which is significantly higher than the reported prevalence in Manitoba and in other similar studies conducted in North America. Furthermore, all individuals were linked to timely care. The present study demonstrated that this particular busy tertiary care ED is an important and feasible location for HIV POC testing.
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 | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".