Brief Report: Medication Sharing Is Rare Among African HIV-1 Serodiscordant Couples Enrolled in an Efficacy Trial of Oral Pre-exposure Prophylaxis (PrEP) for HIV-1 Prevention
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Sharing of pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) medications is a concern for PrEP implementation. For HIV-1 serodiscordant couples, sharing may undermine the HIV-1 prevention benefit and also cause antiretroviral resistance if taken by HIV-1 infected partners. Within a PrEP efficacy trial among HIV-1 serodiscordant couples, we assessed the occurrence of PrEP sharing by self-report and plasma tenofovir concentrations in HIV-1 infected partners. PrEP sharing was self-reported at <0.01% of visits, and 0%-1.6% of randomly selected and 0% of purposively selected specimens from HIV-1 infected participants had detectable tenofovir concentrations (median: 66.5 ng/mL, range: 1.3-292 ng/mL). PrEP sharing within HIV-1 serodiscordant couples was extremely rare.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
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".