MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3023351859 · doi:10.1136/sextrans-2019-sti.433

P322 A brief clinic-based peer-to-peer education intervention to improve prevention practices among sexual minority males

2019· article· en· W3023351859 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenuePoster presentations · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicLGBTQ Health, Identity, and Policy
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPeer educationIntervention (counseling)Peer-to-peerPsychologyPeer reviewPeer groupMedical educationComputer scienceMedicineSocial psychologyHealth educationNursingWorld Wide WebPolitical sciencePublic healthPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

<h3>Background</h3> Gay, bisexual, and other men who have sex with men (GBM) are disproportionately affected by STIs and HIV. Originally efficacious with young Black GBM, Focus on the Future (FoF) is a clinic-based, single session intervention aimed at improving prevention practices. We examined the efficacy of the program when adapted for Vancouver’s ethnoracially diverse GBM communities. <h3>Methods</h3> Participants were recruited from a GBM sexual health clinic and completed a one-time 60-minute education session with a peer health educator. This included condom and lubricant information and condom application skills practice. Between 09/2018–02/2019, each participant completed a baseline survey prior to intervention and again three months later, which were compared using paired t-tests. <h3>Results</h3> A total of24 HIV-negative participants received the intervention: average age was 27.8 years (SD=3.53) and 52% identified as non-white. The intervention was highly acceptable: 87% liked it and 91% would recommend it to others. At 3-month follow-up, participants agreed the intervention increased: knowledge about using lubricants with condoms (83%), condom use skills (78%), and condom use confidence (70%). At baseline, few participants used daily pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP, 17%); post-intervention, 6 PrEP-naïve participants reported initiating PrEP (32%). Overall, condom use frequency during anal sex with male partners did not change (51% baseline versus 58% post-intervention, p=0.41). However, among non-PrEP users, condom use frequency significantly increased during receptive anal sex (61% baseline versus 78% post-intervention, p=0.04) and marginally increased during insertive anal sex (24% baseline versus 48% post-intervention, p=0.11). <h3>Conclusion</h3> The adapted FOF intervention was highly acceptable to ethnoracially diverse GBM in Vancouver. A third of participants initiated PrEP within 90 days. Among participants not using PrEP, the intervention effectively increased condom use during receptive anal sex, when HIV acquisition is most likely. This low-cost intervention demonstrates promise for increasing prevention practices among GBM attending STI clinics in Vancouver. <h3>Disclosure</h3> No significant relationships.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.265
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.005

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.

Opus teacher head0.069
GPT teacher head0.478
Teacher spread0.408 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it