Awareness of, usage of and willingness to use HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis among men in downtown Toronto, Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) is a promising strategy whereby HIV-uninfected people could take antiretroviral (ARV) medications to reduce their risk of HIV acquisition. Reports suggest that unsupervised PrEP use has been occurring in gay communities of USA cities before human safety and efficacy data became available. We administered a 20-item questionnaire to men undergoing HIV testing at Hassle Free Clinic, a sexual health clinic in the gay village of Toronto. Questionnaire items enquired about demographics, sexual partners, substance use and awareness of, usage of and willingness to use PrEP. Logistic regression was used to identify characteristics associated with PrEP-related outcomes. Of 256 participants, 11.7% were aware of PrEP, with more men who have sex with men (MSM) aware (14.1%) than non-MSM (4.9%). No participants reported PrEP usage. Willingness to consider PrEP use was high and associated with high-risk activities, suggesting opportunities for PrEP use in the future.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 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) | 0.003 | 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".