P17 Enhanced sexual health services in community pharmacies – pilot
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background/introduction STI screening via community pharmacies (CPs) has traditionally been very low. Aim(s)/objectives To increase STI screening in young people (15–24 years) in a London Borough with high rates of infection using a new self-test kit (testing for Chlamydia and Gonorrhoea (CT/GC), and HIV) alongside condom distribution via the pan-London condom scheme. Methods Nine CPs were selected based on high rates of Emergency Contraception provision and condom distribution in 2013. Frontline staff were trained and care pathways established. Ongoing monthly support was provided by site-visit and phone. Results were notified by text. Positive results, partner notification and follow-up were managed by a Level 3 GUM clinic. Evaluation was by user/CP survey. Results 8 CPs were active during the pilot which ran January–December 2014. 214 self-test kits were distributed; 108 CT/GC tests and 96 HIV tests were returned/tested (return rates of 50.5% and 44.9% respectively). At the start 1 CP removed HIV tests from packs. 4,476 condoms were distributed. 7 Chlamydia positives were identified (positivity 6.5%). Quarter 1 2014 saw a 700% increase in numbers of STI tests processed) in the 9 CPs compared to Quarter 3 2013 (pre-pilot levels). This significantly increased activity continued throughout 2014. All users were very or quite satisfied with the service and were very or quite likely to use the service again. 66% were very likely to recommend the service to others Discussion/conclusion With adequate training and support, community pharmacies provide an engaged, accessible and convenient venue for STI testing (including HIV) and condom distribution.
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 | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.017 | 0.002 |
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".