Invalid Results in the GetaKit Study in Ottawa: A Real-World Observation of the INSTI® HIV Self-test Among Persons At Risk for HIV
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT: HIV self-testing corresponds with more frequent testing, better user satisfaction, and higher positivity rates compared with clinic-based testing. We implemented an open cohort prospective observational study, which provided a website through which persons could do online HIV self-assessments and, if eligible, receive a free HIV self-test. We implemented this project on July 20, 2021 and used the bioLytical INSTI® test. Herein, we describe the number of tests participants reported as invalid, which started at a rate of one fifth of all ordered tests and decreased to 8% after we provided more instructions on completing the test. Our data suggest that a high rate of invalids occur with self-testing in the real-world. Although this has cost implications, we feel this rate is acceptable, considering that 25% of our cohort reported no previous HIV testing. Our take-away message is that HIV self-testing requires additional supports and resources to function as an effective testing intervention.
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 | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".