MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3182603886 · doi:10.1136/sextrans-2021-sti.249

P138 Evaluating Opt-Out STI Testing at Admission within a Short-Term Correctional Facility Located in Alberta, Canada

2021· article· en· W3182603886 on OpenAlexaffabout
Auld Reekie, Jennifer Gratrix, Rafi Ahmed, Petra Smyczek

Bibliographic record

VenuePoster presentations · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCriminal Justice and Corrections Analysis
Canadian institutionsAlberta Health ServicesUniversity of AlbertaUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineGonorrheaSyphilisChlamydiaPopulationAsymptomaticSexually transmitted diseaseDemographyPediatricsEmergency medicineFamily medicineHuman immunodeficiency virus (HIV)Environmental healthInternal medicineImmunology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background Incarcerated Canadians entering into correctional facilities experience higher rates of sexually transmitted infections (STI) than the general population. Yet, testing across correctional facilities remains inconsistent and symptom- or risk-based. Thus, STI prevalence is likely underestimated, and the number of undiagnosed individuals remains high. In response, Alberta implemented universal opt-out STI (chlamydia, gonorrhea, syphilis)/HIV screening at admission in a short-term correctional facility for all individuals ≤ 35 years. This study evaluates opt-out screening at admission to provide Canadian-specific data as a comparative to current opt-in (symptom/risk-based) testing strategies. Specific outcomes were determined: (1) the uptake of opt-out screening, (2) reasons for opt-out screening non-completion, (3) STI/HIV positivity rates and (4) treatment completion rates. Methods A cross-sectional, retrospective analysis of opt-out screening outcomes between March 2018 and February 2020 was completed. Test data was extracted from admission line-lists, laboratory data and communicable disease treatment data. Descriptive statistics were used to stratify test data by STI, gender, age group, and date for univariate analysis. Results Opt-out screening was offered to the majority (96.7%) of admissions, while opt-out screening non-completion was largely attributed to patient decline (67.4%). Despite low testing uptake (31.2%), opt-out screening achieved high positivity rates (14.9% chlamydia, 10.8% gonorrhea, 29.5% syphilis and 0.3% HIV) and treatment completion rates (94.1% overall). Furthermore, 52.6% of opt-out cases were asymptomatic. Conclusions Although limited by retrospective analysis, opt-out screening at admission is a feasible strategy to increase STI/HIV testing and detect asymptomatic cases in a correctional setting. Communicative strategies within the facility will be critical to increase testing uptake among patients. Intensified screening and subsequent treatment can impact community transmission while reducing healthcare accessibility barriers for a vulnerable population. Further, implementing opt-out STI/HIV screening in other high-risk settings, such as mental health and addictions, can be an effective case-finding strategy for outbreak management.

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)0.004
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 score0.032
Threshold uncertainty score0.230

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.098
GPT teacher head0.381
Teacher spread0.283 · 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

Citations2
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePoster presentationsSame topicCriminal Justice and Corrections AnalysisFrench-language works237,207