MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1665902343 · doi:10.2196/resprot.2723

An Internet-Based Intervention Condom-Him to Increase Condom Use Among Human Immunodeficiency Virus-Positive Men Who Have Sex With Men: Protocol for a Randomized Controlled Trial

2013· article· en· W1665902343 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Joyal Miranda, José Côté, Gaston Godin, Martin Blais, Joanne Otis, Yann‐Gaël Guéhéneuc, Ghayas Fadel, Luisa Barton, Shawn Fowler

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Research Protocols · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHIV/AIDS Research and Interventions
Canadian institutionsHassle Free ClinicCoalition des Organismes Communautaires Québécois de Lutte Contre le SidaPolytechnique MontréalUniversité du Québec à MontréalUniversité LavalUniversité de MontréalRegroupement des Organismes Communautaires Québécoise de Lutte au DécrochageCentre Hospitalier de l’Université de MontréalToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCondomMen who have sex with menPsychological interventionIntervention (counseling)Randomized controlled trialMedicinePopulationHuman immunodeficiency virus (HIV)Family medicineEnvironmental healthPsychiatryInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: In the recent years, the Internet has been used as a medium to find sexual partners and engage in risky sexual behavior. This has changed the way in which men having have sex with men (MSM) seek sexual partners and has increased the number of high-risk sexual encounters. Therefore, developers of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-prevention interventions have also started using the Internet as a viable medium to promote safe sexual behaviors. However, much of the efforts thus far have been aimed at HIV-negative rather than HIV-positive MSM. HIV-positive individuals continue to engage in risky sexual behaviors and thus constitute an important group in which HIV prevention strategies need to be addressed. Therefore, HIV prevention in HIV-positive MSM is a critical issue. OBJECTIVE: Condom-Him, an Internet-based intervention tailored to increase condom use among HIV-positive MSM, was developed with the aim of improving condom use, self-efficacy, and intentions to use condoms among these individuals. The acceptability and feasibility of this Internet-based intervention will be examined in a pilot study. METHODS: We will perform a randomized controlled parallel-group superiority trial. HIV-positive MSM who currently engage in unprotected anal sex will be recruited for the study. Participants will be randomly assigned using a one-to-one allocation ratio generated by the computer program. The researchers will be blinded to participant's group assignment. Participants will be assigned either to use the Condom-Him intervention (experimental arm) or to view a list of websites containing HIV/AIDS related information (control arm). Self-administered questionnaires will be provided online before randomization (baseline) and two weeks after intervention (post-test). RESULTS: The study will include a total of 60 participants with 30 in each group. The results from this pilot study will provide further evidence for a larger study to examine the effectiveness of this intervention and will provide a cost-effective and widely accessible approach to HIV prevention for HIV-positive MSM. CONCLUSIONS: Internet-based interventions for HIV-positive MSM, a population that has been under-represented in the efforts for positive prevention of HIV within Canada, have the potential to provide a cost-effective strategy, which influences the way in which information is accessed and provided to high-risk individuals. The advantages of an Internet-based intervention include the potential to provide consistency in the delivery of an intervention and the ability to disseminate the intervention to a wider population. Internet-based interventions are perceived as vital tools in combating HIV infection within the realm of social media. Therefore, it is important to determine the feasibility and acceptability of these interventions before implementing them. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT01726153; http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01726153 (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/6Jljzip8B).

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)0.032
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.031
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.092
Threshold uncertainty score0.307

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0320.031
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0080.004
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0170.006
Bibliometrics0.0040.004
Science and technology studies0.0040.004
Scholarly communication0.0050.004
Open science0.0050.003
Research integrity0.0110.010
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0920.012

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 head0.082
GPT teacher head0.504
Teacher spread0.421 · 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 designRandomized trial
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

Citations21
Published2013
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Research ProtocolsSame topicHIV/AIDS Research and InterventionsFrench-language works237,207