Peer outreach point-of-care testing as a bridge to hepatitis C care for people who inject drugs in Toronto, Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: People who inject drugs have high rates of hepatitis C (HCV) and yet many remain undiagnosed and untreated. HCV treatment guidelines and elimination strategies recommend task-shifting to expand where, and by whom, HCV testing and care is delivered. METHODS: A randomized controlled trial design was used to evaluate if point-of-care (POC) HCV antibody testing by peer outreach workers outside of health and social service spaces would improve engagement in HCV care. People with a lifetime history of injection drug use without prior knowledge of HCV antibody status were randomized to receive HCV outreach plus either POC or referral to community-based HCV program for testing as usual. The study was co-designed by people with lived experience of HCV. RESULTS: 920 people were approached to participate over 14 weeks. After refusals, withdrawals and removal of duplicates, there were 380 study participants. Outreach took place primarily in public spaces (66%) such as parks, coffee shops and apartment lobbies. Participants reported very high rates of poverty, housing instability and recent injection drug use. Despite being at high risk for HCV, 61% had no history or knowledge of past HCV testing (n = 230). Of those who received a POC test 77/195 (39%) were positive for HCV antibodies. There was no change in rates of engagement in HCV care among those who received the POC (n = 6; 3%) compared to those who did not (n = 5; 3%). CONCLUSION: Peer outreach workers were able to efficiently reach a marginalized group of individuals who had a high HCV antibody prevalence and low rates of prior HCV testing. This improved participants' knowledge of their HCV antibody status, but that knowledge in itself did not lead to any change in participant's subsequent engagement in HCV care. Future work is required to evaluate strategies such as incentives or peer navigators to improve linkage to HCV care after diagnosis.
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 | 0.000 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 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".