Non-occupational post-exposure prophylaxis for HIV at St Michael's Hospital, Toronto: a retrospective review of patient eligibility and clinical outcomes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Stringent eligibility criteria, drug costs and antiretroviral toxicities are challenges in delivering HIV non-occupational post-exposure prophylaxis (nPEP). We reviewed patients' nPEP eligibility and clinical outcomes at St Michael's Hospital, Toronto, Canada to identify opportunities for improvement. Of 241 patients, 59%, 36% and 6% presented for high- (receptive anal/vaginal, blood), medium- (insertive anal/vaginal) and low-risk (oral) sexual exposures, respectively, and nearly all (93%) presented within 72 hours. Of 205 patients given nPEP, 20 were known to have discontinued nPEP prematurely: three due to costs but none due to toxicities. Two HIV seroconversions occurred in patients with suspected ongoing potential exposures. Five asymptomatic syphilis diagnoses were made among 71 tested. Only 39% and 19% of nPEP patients returned to our institution for follow-up at 3-4 and six months, respectively. Our findings underscore the feasibility and importance of nPEP programmes to HIV and sexually transmitted infection control, while identifying opportunities for improvement.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".