The Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis-Stigma Paradox: Learning from Canada's First Wave of PrEP Users
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
With the emergence of daily oral tenofovir disoproxil fumarate and emtricitabine-based pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) use in Canada, questions have emerged concerning the impacts of this HIV prevention tool on gay men's social and sexual lives. We conducted small focus groups and individual qualitative interviews with 16 gay men in Toronto who were part of the 'first wave' of Canadian PrEP users. Participants were on PrEP for at least one year as part of a demonstration project (November 2014-June 2016). These participants accessed PrEP before regulatory approval by Health Canada in February 2016. The mean age of participants was 37.6 years (SD 11.02); 94% completed secondary education, and 69% were white. Sex-stigma emerged as a complex theme in men's accounts of PrEP use across three overlapping domains: (1) PrEP-related stigma, including discussions of concealment and stigma from friends, family, and sexual partners, (2) PrEP as a perceived tool for combating HIV-related stigma, where some men said that they no longer discussed HIV status with sexual partners, and (3) PrEP as illuminating structural stigma, where it was attributed to unmasking stigma related to sex and sexuality. For some participants, PrEP has allowed for liberating sex and a self-described return to normalcy-normal, exciting, pleasurable sex that was no longer reliant on condom use. Paradoxically, some men said that PrEP use both led them to experience stigmatizing reactions within their social and sexual networks, while also helping to remove stigma, shame, and fear related to HIV, sexuality, and sex with gay men living with HIV.
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it