Optimizing PrEP Continuance: A Secondary Analysis Examining Perceived Autonomy Support and Care Coordination Quality among Black MSM in HPTN 073
Bibliographic record
Abstract
At the end of year 2018, it was estimated that in the United States over 1 million people were living with HIV. Although Black/African American individuals comprise an estimated 13.4% of the US population, as of 2019, they represented an estimated 42% of all new HIV diagnoses in 2018. PrEP use among Black men who have sex with men has not reached levels sufficient to have a population impact on HIV incidence. The purpose of this study was to examine whether high perceived autonomy support and care coordination quality were associated with PrEP continuation. Secondary analyses were conducted on data with 226 Black MSM in three US cities. Participants who were PrEP users and scored higher on autonomy support at week 8 were significantly more likely to continue PrEP (OR 1.48; 95% CI 1.04-2.11). Perception of coordination quality did not differ between PrEP users and non-users at any of the visits. Although coordination quality was not statistically significant, greater than half of PrEP users and non-PrEP users utilized the C4 services. Addressing social, individual, and structural barriers to PrEP may benefit Black MSM irrespective of their PrEP use.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".