Adolescent Male Couples-Based HIV Testing Intervention (We Test): Protocol for a Type 1, Hybrid Implementation-Effectiveness Trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Young men who have sex with men (YMSM), particularly those who are partnered, are at unique risk for HIV. YMSM are among those at highest risk for HIV. Meanwhile, despite the fact that primary partners account for many-possibly most-new HIV infections, partnered men who have sex with men perceive themselves to be at much lower risk for HIV infection and therefore test less often than single men. In response to the risk of primary partner HIV transmission, couples HIV testing and counseling (CHTC) procedures have been developed for use in adult populations. Although promising, YMSM couples may require additional support to complete CHTC given their developmental context in which sexual and romantic relationships are relatively new, and communication skills are emergent. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to test the additive benefit of adjunct treatment components tailored for YMSM, which enhance communication skills before the completion of CHTC. The intervention tests a continuum of prevention packages including assertive communication training videos and motivational interviewing focused on assisting with identification and development (MI-AID) before entering into the dyadic intervention components. This protocol is part of the Adolescent Medicine Trials Network (ATN) Scale It Up program described in this issue. METHODS: This is a comparative effectiveness trial that will be executed in 3 phases. Phase 1 will gather qualitative data related to intervention development and implementation from partnered YMSM at 4 subject recruitment venues (SRVs). Phase 2 will compare a continuum of these interventions in a pilot randomized controlled trial (RCT) at 2 SRVs. Phase 3 will compare the most successful adapted intervention package from phase 2 to CHTC as usual in a larger RCT at 4 SRVs. This phase is focused on implementation and sustainment phases of the Exploration, Preparation, Implementation, and Sustainment framework. RESULTS: =144) and follow-ups will occur at 1, 3, 6, and 9 months postintervention. CONCLUSIONS: Although MI-AID, video-based assertive communication training, and CHTC have established efficacy when administered on their own, this study will be the first to evaluate the strongest adjunctive version of these interventions to address the specific developmental needs of partnered YMSM. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03386110; http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03386110 (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/75mlO7GCx). INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/11186.
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 | 0.044 | 0.033 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.008 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.011 | 0.005 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.010 | 0.012 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.113 | 0.021 |
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".