Uptake of Rapid Point-of-Care HIV Testing Among Gay and Bisexual Men in Vancouver, Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Gay and bisexual men (GBM) are the most affected HIV risk group in Canada and account for 58% of new diagnoses in British Columbia. As rapid point-of-care HIV testing (POCT) may help reduce testing barriers, we explored factors associated with POCT. Sexually active GBM age ≥16 years in Vancouver, Canada were recruited using respondent driven sampling (RDS) from 2012-2014. We restricted the sample to HIV-negative men and those HIV-diagnosed within the past 2 years. Participants completed a computer-assisted self-interview assessing demographics, sexual behaviour/risk, health service utilization, and experiences with testing for HIV and sexually transmitted infections (STIs). We used multivariable logistic regression with backward selection to examine factors associated with uptake of POCT. All analyses used RDS weighting. Of 535 participants, median age was 30 years, 81.3% identified as gay, and 66.7% as White. 79.9% had tested for HIV in the past 2 years and of these, 45.4% reported a rapid POCT at last test. Among testers, odds of POCT were greater among GBM who were <30 years, lived downtown, tested at sexual health clinics (vs not), had never previously tested for STIs, accessed healthcare from hospital emergency rooms, used “HIV viral load sorting” as a prevention strategy, and were not “out”. Odds of rapid testing were lower among Asian and Latino GBM (versus White) and among GBM who used anal sex avoidance as a prevention strategy. Recent condomless anal sex with unknown/serodiscordant partners was not associated with POCT.
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 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 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".