MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3092101661 · doi:10.25148/etd.fidc007782

Identifying Gay Neighborhoods and Estimation of the Size of the Men who have Sex with Men Population in Florida who would benefit from Pre-exposure Prophylaxis

2019· dissertation· en· W3092101661 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Daniel E. Mauck

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHIV, Drug Use, Sexual Risk
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersFlorida International University
KeywordsMen who have sex with menPre-exposure prophylaxisDemographyPopulationHuman immunodeficiency virus (HIV)EstimationHomosexualityMedicinePopulation sizeGerontologyGeographyEnvironmental healthPsychologyFamily medicineSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Given the potential benefit of pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) among men who have sex with men (MSM) at risk for human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), it would be useful to assess the size of the at-risk population and their geographic distribution to target PrEP and other prevention programs efficiently. In 2017, Florida ranked third for HIV diagnosis rates in the US, and 63% of those who received a new HIV diagnosis in Florida were MSM. The purpose of this dissertation was to 1) summarize population-based methods to estimate the size of the population of MSM, 2) identify gay neighborhoods using latent class analysis (LCA), and 3) estimate the size of the MSM population in Florida. A systematic review of population-based methods to estimate the size of the MSM population was conducted. Twenty-eight studies met inclusion criteria. Sixteen studies were conducted in the US, five in European countries, two in Canada, three in Australia, one in Israel, and one in Kenya. Men who have sex with men made up 0.03–6.4% of men among all studies and ranged from 3.8–6.4% in the US, 7,000–39,100 in Canada, 0.03–6.5% in European countries, and 127,947–182,624 in Australia. Latent class analysis was used to identify gay neighborhoods in Florida. Data at the ZIP code level was drawn from the 2011–2015 ACS, website lists of gay bars and neighborhoods, and the Florida Department of Health’s HIV surveillance system. A two-class model was selected. About 9% of the ZIP code data were in class two (gay neighborhoods). Cohen’s kappa coefficient was used to examine agreement between the classification of ZIP codes from LCA and gay neighborhoods from websites. Fair agreement was found (0.2501). Three methods were used to estimate the MSM population in Florida with high-risk behaviors that would indicate eligibility for PrEP use. The resulting three estimates were averaged, and the number of MSM living with HIV infection in each ZIP code was subtracted. The average MSM estimate in ZIP codes ranged from 1–2,184 men (1.5–22.9%). The presumed HIV-negative MSM estimate in ZIP codes ranged from 1–1,346 men (0.02–12.7%). Indications for PrEP were highest for MSM with more than one sex partner in the past year and lowest when the estimate was multiplied by 24.7% (percent of MSM with PrEP indications from other studies). In conclusion, there is no widely accepted method to estimate the size of the MSM population, and estimates vary substantially based on the method used.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.025
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score0.045

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.025
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.003
Bibliometrics0.0060.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.017
GPT teacher head0.306
Teacher spread0.289 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicHIV, Drug Use, Sexual Risk→French-language works237,207→