MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W184261913 · doi:10.1177/135965350801300109

Prospective Cohort Study of HIV Post-Exposure Prophylaxis for Sexual Assault Survivors

2008· article· en· W184261913 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueAntiviral Therapy · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSexual Assault and Victimization Studies
Canadian institutionsHealth Sciences CentreSunnybrook Health Science CentreSt. Michael's HospitalOntario HIV Treatment NetworkWomen's College HospitalUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineProspective cohort studyOdds ratioCohortConfidence intervalLogistic regressionCohort studyRisk assessmentInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: There is a lack of standardized programs for HIV counselling and post-exposure prophylaxis (PEP) in the setting of sexual assault. METHODS: We conducted an 18-month prospective cohort study assessing universal HIV counselling for all sexual assault survivors presenting to 18 Ontario Sexual Assault Treatment Centres. HIV PEP was universally offered to those at risk of HIV infection (high risk or unknown risk) presenting < or =72 h after the assault, using Combivir one pill and Kaletra three capsules twice a day for 28 days. Those who accepted HIV PEP were monitored via a schedule of frequent follow ups. The primary outcomes were acceptance and completion rates, and their predictors were determined using multivariable logistic regression. Adverse events (AE) were categorized using a standardized toxicity grading system. RESULTS: Of the 900 evaluable participants eligible for PEP, 798 (69 at high risk and 729 at unknown risk) were offered treatment. Acceptance rates were 66.7% (n=46) and 41.3% (n=301) for participants at high risk and unknown risk, respectively. Participants at high risk were 2.2 times more likely to accept PEP than those at unknown risk (adjusted odds ratio 2.2; 95% confidence interval 1.2-4.0; P=0.01). Overall, 23.9% high-risk (n=11) and 33.2% unknown-risk participants (n=100) completed PEP (P=0.20). Predictors of acceptance and completion included assault by a stranger and participant anxiety. AEs were common, with 77.1% of participants reporting grade 2-4 symptoms. CONCLUSION: A province-wide standardized program of universal HIV counselling and offering of PEP to sexual assault survivors with frequent follow up was successfully implemented and feasible.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.629

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.327
Teacher spread0.287 · 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