An Intervention to Increase Condom Use Among Users of Chlamydia Self-Sampling Websites (Wrapped): Intervention Mapping and Think-Aloud Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Young people aged 16-24 years are disproportionately affected by sexually transmitted infections (STIs). STIs can have serious health consequences for affected individuals and the estimated annual cost of treatment to the National Health Service is £620 million. Accordingly, the UK government has made reducing the rates of STIs among this group a priority. A missed opportunity to intervene to increase condom use is when young people obtain self-sampling kits for STIs via the internet. OBJECTIVE: Our aim was to develop a theory-based tailored intervention to increase condom use for 16-24-years-olds accessing chlamydia self-sampling websites. METHODS: The intervention, Wrapped, was developed using Intervention Mapping and was co-designed with young people. The following steps were performed: (1) identification of important determinants of condom use and evidence of their changeability using computer and digital interventions; (2) setting the intervention goal, performance objectives, and change objectives; (3) identification of Behavior Change Principles (BCPs) and practical strategies to target these determinants; and (4) development of intervention materials able to deliver the BCPs and practical strategies. RESULTS: Users of existing chlamydia self-sampling websites are signposted to Wrapped after placing an order for a sampling kit. Salient barriers to condom use are identified by each user and relevant intervention components are allocated to target these. The components include the following: (1) a sample box of condoms, (2) an online condom distribution service, (3) a product for carrying condoms, (4) a condom demonstration video, (5) a series of videos on communication about condom use, and (6) erotic films of real couples discussing and demonstrating condom use. CONCLUSIONS: This intervention will be directed at young people who may be particularly receptive to messages and support for behavior change due to their testing status.
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 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 | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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 teacher head, 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".