MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3124223837 · doi:10.2196/24234

Context and Barriers to the Prescription of Nonoccupational Postexposure Prophylaxis Among HIV Medical Care Providers: National Internet-Based Observational Study in China

2021· article· en· W3124223837 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Haibo Ding, Zehao Ye, Weiming Tang, Xiaojie Huang, Hui Wang, Sitong Cui, Yongjun Jiang, Wenqing Geng, Junjie Xu, Hong Shang

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Public Health and Surveillance · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHIV/AIDS Research and Interventions
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Science and Technology Major ProjectNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsMedicineFamily medicineMedical prescriptionPost-exposure prophylaxisContext (archaeology)Odds ratioMainland ChinaChinaHuman immunodeficiency virus (HIV)NursingInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Nonoccupational postexposure prophylaxis (nPEP) is an effective HIV biomedical prevention strategy. The research and use of nPEP are mainly concentrated in the developed world, while little is known about the knowledge, attitudes, and practices of nPEP among HIV medical care providers in developing countries. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to assess the nPEP knowledge and prescribing practice among HIV medical care providers in mainland China. METHODS: HIV medical care providers were recruited in China during May and June 2019 through an online survey regarding nPEP-related knowledge, attitudes, and clinical prescription experiences. Multivariable logistic regression was performed to identify factors associated with prescribing nPEP among HIV medical care providers. RESULTS: A total of 777 eligible participants participated in this study from 133 cities in 31 provinces in China. Of the participants, 60.2% (468/777) were unfamiliar with nPEP and only 53.3% (414/777) of participants ever prescribed nPEP. HIV care providers who worked in a specialized infectious disease hospital (vs general hospital, adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 2.49; 95% CI 1.85-3.37), had practiced for 6-10 years (vs 5 or fewer years, aOR 3.28; 95% CI 2.23-4.80), had practiced for 11 years or more (vs 5 or fewer years, aOR 3.75; 95% CI 2.59-5.45), and had previously prescribed occupational PEP (oPEP, aOR 4.90; 95% CI 3.29-7.29) had a significantly positive association with prescribing nPEP. However, unfamiliarity with nPEP (aOR 0.08; 95% CI 0.05-0.11), believing nPEP may promote HIV high-risk behavior (aOR 0.53; 95% CI 0.36-0.77) or result in HIV drug resistance (aOR 0.53; 95% CI 0.36-0.77) among key populations, and self-reported having no written oPEP guideline in place (aOR 0.53; 95% CI 0.35-0.79) were negatively associated with nPEP prescription behavior. CONCLUSIONS: HIV medical care providers have insufficient nPEP knowledge and an inadequate proportion of prescribing, which may impede the scale-up of nPEP services to curb HIV acquisition. The implementation of tailored nPEP training or retraining to HIV medical care providers would improve this situation.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.069
Threshold uncertainty score0.137

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.360
Teacher spread0.313 · 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

Citations3
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Public Health and Surveillance→Same topicHIV/AIDS Research and Interventions→French-language works237,207→