Compliance with time‐based deferrals for men who have sex with men
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The deferral for men who have sex with men (MSM) was reduced from a permanent deferral for MSM if even one time since 1977 to progressively shorter time deferrals of 5 years and 1 year in Canada. We assessed compliance with these deferrals and the impact on safety at Canadian Blood Services. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: Three anonymous online compliance surveys of male whole blood donors were carried out before and after implementation of successive changes. HIV rates and incidence were monitored from January 1, 2011, to August 14, 2018. RESULTS: Participation rates in the consecutive surveys were 49.7% before implementation, 36.3% after 5 years and 36.3% after 1 year. There was no difference before versus after implementation in male donors with MSM history in the past year (0.21%, 0.19%, 0.24%; p = 0.70). The percentage of eligible MSM donors increased (0.13%, 0.66%, 1.21%; p < 0.0001), with approximately 2500 eligible MSM donors with the 1-year deferral in place. HIV rates were less than 0.6 per 100,000 donations and unchanged after each policy change (p = 0.14 for trend). Incidence remained unchanged at 0.22 per 100,000 person-years before implementation, 0.54 per 100,000 after 5-year deferral, and no incident cases after 1-year deferral (p = 0.55). CONCLUSION: Progressively shorter time deferrals had no impact on noncompliance of MSM with a male partner in the past year. Contrary to modeling predictions, shorter time deferrals had no impact on HIV rates or incidence. There was a modest increase in eligible MSM in the donor pool after each shorter time deferral. These results support the safety of reducing deferral periods for MSM.
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 | 0.007 | 0.024 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".