Spare non-occupational HIV post-exposure prophylaxis by active contacting and testing of the source person
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: HIV-1 post-exposure prophylaxis (PEP) is frequently prescribed after exposure to source persons with an undetermined HIV serostatus. To reduce unnecessary use of PEP, we implemented a policy including active contacting of source persons and the availability of free, anonymous HIV testing ('PEP policy'). METHODS: All consultations for potential non-occupational HIV exposures i.e. outside the medical environment) were prospectively recorded. The impact of the PEP policy on PEP prescription and costs was analysed and modelled. RESULTS: Among 146 putative exposures, 47 involved a source person already known to be HIV positive and 23 had no indication for PEP. The remaining 76 exposures involved a source person of unknown HIV serostatus. Of 33 (43.4%) exposures for which the source person could be contacted and tested, PEP was avoided in 24 (72.7%), initiated and discontinued in seven (21.2%), and prescribed and completed in two (6.1%). In contrast, of 43 (56.6%) exposures for which the source person could not be tested, PEP was prescribed in 35 (81.4%), P < 0.001. Upon modelling, the PEP policy allowed a 31% reduction of cost for management of exposures to source persons of unknown HIV serostatus. The policy was cost-saving for HIV prevalence of up to 70% in the source population. The availability of all the source persons for testing would have reduced cost by 64%. CONCLUSION: In the management of non-occupational HIV exposures, active contacting and free, anonymous testing of source persons proved feasible. This policy resulted in a decrease in prescription of PEP, proved to be cost-saving, and presumably helped to avoid unnecessary toxicity and psychological stress.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".