MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2281762096 · doi:10.1080/09540121.2016.1146653

Uptake of PrEP and condom and sexual risk behavior among MSM during the ANRS IPERGAY trial

2016· article· en· W2281762096 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.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueAIDS Care · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHIV/AIDS Research and Interventions
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersAgence Nationale de Recherches sur le Sida et les Hépatites ViralesCanadian HIV Trials Network, Canadian Institutes of Health ResearchAgence Nationale de la RechercheBill and Melinda Gates Foundation
KeywordsCondomMedicinePre-exposure prophylaxisMen who have sex with menDemographyGynecologyHuman immunodeficiency virus (HIV)Sexual intercourseAnal sexPopulationFamily medicineEnvironmental healthSyphilis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The double-blind phase of the randomized ANRS IPERGAY trial, evaluating sexual activity-based oral HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP), was conducted among high-risk men who have sex with men (MSM). Results showed an 86% (95% CI: 40-98) relative reduction in HIV incidence among participants with tenofovir disoproxil fumarate-emtricitabine vs. placebo. The present pooled analysis aimed to analyze (i) participants' adherence to the prescribed treatment and/or condom use during sexual intercourse and (ii) sexual behavior during the double-blind phase of the study. Four hundred MSM were enrolled in the trial. Every 2 months they completed online questionnaires collecting sexual behavior and PrEP adherence data regarding their most recent sexual intercourse. A total of 2232 questionnaires (M0-M24) were analyzed. Changes over time were evaluated using a mixed model accounting for multiple measures. Irrespective of sexual partner and practice type, on average, 42.6% (min: 32.1-max: 45.8%) reported PrEP use only during their most recent episode of sexual intercourse; 29% (22.9-35.6%) reported both PrEP and condom use; 11.7% (7.2-18.9%) reported condom-use only, and 16.7% (10.8-29.6%) reported no PrEP or condom use with no significant change during the study. Scheduled (i.e., correct) PrEP use was reported on average by 59.0% (47.2-68.5%) of those reporting PrEP use during their most recent sexual intercourse. Overall, 70.3% (65.3-79.4%) and 69.3% (58.3-75.4%) of participants reported, respectively, condomless anal and condomless receptive anal intercourse during their most recent sexual encounter without significant change during follow-up. Overall, on average 83.3% (min: 70.4-max: 89.2%) of participants protected themselves by PrEP intake or condom use or both during the trial, and no increase in at-risk sexual practices was observed. None of these indicators showed significant trend during the follow-up, although we found a tendency toward decrease (p = .19) of the median number of sexual partners strengthening the absence of behavioral disinhibition. On-demand PrEP within a comprehensive HIV prevention package could improve prevention in MSM.

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)0.000
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 score0.223
Threshold uncertainty score0.249

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.308
Teacher spread0.292 · 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