Canadian guidelines on HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) and non-occupational post-exposure prophylaxis (nPEP): Discussion beyond the guidelines and commentary on the role of infectious diseases specialists
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) and non-occupational post-exposure prophylaxis (nPEP) are part of combination HIV prevention strategies that include behavioural interventions such as condoms and risk-reduction counselling. A 25-member panel was convened to develop Canadian guidelines for PrEP and nPEP, with the full guidelines recently published in the Canadian Medical Association Journal (CMAJ). This article provides a discussion beyond the guideline, highlighting areas of particular interest to infectious disease (ID) specialists and discusses the possible role of ID specialists as access to both PrEP and nPEP become more widely available across the country.
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 | 0.034 | 0.122 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.011 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.010 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.024 | 0.029 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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".