Nonclinical Sexual Health Support for HIV, Viral Hepatitis, and Other Sexually Transmitted Infections in Gay, Bisexual, and Other Men Who Have Sex With Men: Protocol for a European Community Health Worker Online Survey (ECHOES)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The term "community health worker" (CHW) can apply to a wide range of individuals providing health services and support for diverse populations. Very little is known about the role of CHWs in Europe working in nonclinical settings who promote sexual health and prevent HIV and other sexually transmitted infections (STIs) among gay, bisexual, and other men who have sex with men (MSM). OBJECTIVE: This paper describes the development and piloting of the first European Community Health Worker Online Survey (ECHOES) as part of the broader European Union-funded ESTICOM (European Surveys and Trainings to Improve MSM Community Health) project. The questionnaire aimed to assess the knowledge, attitudes, and practices of CHWs providing sexual health services to gay, bisexual, and other MSM in European settings. METHODS: ECHOES comprises three superordinate domains divided into 10 subsections with 175 items (routed) based on a scoping exercise and literature review, online prepiloting, and Europe-wide consultation. Additional piloting and cognitive debriefing interviews with stakeholders were conducted to identify comprehension issues and improve the clarity, intelligibility, accessibility, and acceptability of the survey. Psychometric properties, including internal consistency of the standardized scales used as part of the survey were examined. The final survey was available to 33 countries in 16 languages. RESULTS: Recruitment closed on January 31, 2018. Data from 1035 CHWs were available for analysis after application of the exclusion criteria. The findings of the ECHOES survey and the wider ESTICOM project, are now available from the ESTICOM website and/or by contacting the first author. CONCLUSIONS: The findings of this survey will help characterize, for the first time, the diverse role of CHWs who provide sexual health services to gay, bisexual, and other MSM in Europe. Importantly, the data will be used to inform the content and design of a dedicated training program for CHWs as part of the larger ESTICOM project and provide recommendations for MSM-specific strategies to improve sexual health in general and to reduce the incidence and prevalence of HIV, viral hepatitis, and other STIs in particular. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): RR1-10.2196/15012.
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
Direct model labels (unvalidated)
Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.
| Model arm | Categories | Study design | Confidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| gpt | no category Domain: not available · Genre: Protocol About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no | Not applicable | high |
| grok | no category Domain: not available · Genre: Protocol About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no | Not applicable | high |
| opus | no category Domain: not available · Genre: Protocol About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no | Observational | high |
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 | 0.042 | 0.020 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.038 | 0.009 |
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, unvalidatedLabeled directly by 3 models reading the full record.
The models disagree on parts of this classification; every voice is preserved in the section at the end of the page.
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".