Standardised protocol for a prospective cross-sectional multicentre clinical utility evaluation of two dual point-of-care tests in non-clinical settings for the screening of HIV and syphilis in men who have sex with men
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Point-of-care dual tests (POCTs) for simultaneously detecting antibodies to HIV and syphilis (dual HIV-syphilis POCTs) have been developed recently and show encouraging performance compared with the reference tests in laboratory-based studies. As community-based voluntary, counselling and testing (CBVCT) services are effective providers of HIV and syphilis testing and counselling with high acceptability among men who have sex with men (MSM), the evaluation of the utility of these dual tests in CBVCT services is a high priority. This prospective cross-sectional study will conduct a clinical utility evaluation of two dual POCTs in non-clinical settings for the screening of HIV and syphilis in MSM. This master protocol outlines the overall research approach that will be used in four countries. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: MSM presenting at CBVCT services participating in the study for HIV/STI screening will be enrolled. The (WHO preapproved) dual POCTs to be evaluated will be SD Bioline HIV/Syphilis Duo (Abbot) and Dual Path Platform HIV-Syphilis Assay (Chembio). Trained staff will collect a capillary blood sample using finger prick blood to perform both POCTs according the manufacturers' instructions. An analysis of the feasibility of introducing the dual POCT for the screening of HIV and syphilis in MSM at CBVCT services will be performed, by assessing its acceptability and usability at CBVCT service among MSM users and providers. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This core protocol was independently peer reviewed and approved by the Research Project Review Panel (RP2) of the WHO Department of Sexual and Reproductive Health and Research and by the WHO Ethics Review Committee (ERC). The protocol has been adapted to individual countries and approved by RP2, ERC and institutional review boards at each site. Results will be disseminated through peer-reviewed journals and relevant conferences.
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 | 0.064 | 0.046 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.083 | 0.029 |
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".