MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4311737796 · doi:10.1093/ofid/ofac492.1687

2065. Increasing the HIV screening rates in Rural Syringes Service Programs

2022· article· en· W4311737796 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Jana Collins, Jaime Soria, James Thacker, Greg Corby-Lee, Connie White, Tisha Johnson, Ardis Hoven, Alice Thornton

Bibliographic record

VenueOpen Forum Infectious Diseases · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHIV, Drug Use, Sexual Risk
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineHuman immunodeficiency virus (HIV)Quarter (Canadian coin)SyringeFamily medicineHIV screeningMen who have sex with menSyphilis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background The Kentucky Income Reinvestment Program (KIRP) is a statewide reinvestment of income generated by the Ryan White HIV/AIDS Program (RWHAP) Kentucky AIDS Drug Assistance Program, which provides comprehensive early intervention services targeting those at the highest risk for HIV infection. The objective of this study was to compare the HIV screening rates in persons who inject drugs (PWID) at Syringe Service Programs (SSP) supported by KIRP versus SSPs not supported by KIRP in Kentucky Methods A cross-sectional study was conducted on 54 SSPs. We compared the HIV screening rates in the first quarter of 2020, 2021, and 2022. Fisher's exact test compared the HIV screening rates between the KIRP supported SSPs (KSSP) versus Non-KIRP supported SSPs (NKSSP). Study data were collected and managed using REDCap electronic data capture tools hosted at Kentucky Department for Public Health. The statistical analyses were performed with Stata 17 (College Station, TX: Stata Corp LLC). Results The analysis included data of 21,072 PWID who attended the SSPs utilizing the REDCap electronic data capture tool during the study timeframe. In the first quarter of 2022, a total of 1,607/4795 (33.5%) PWID were screened for HIV at KSSP vs 12/482 (2.5%) at NKSSP (p=< 0.001). The difference in the screening rates has increased over the years since the KIRP began in 2019 (Figure 1). Conclusion The HIV screening rate in PWID has increased significantly in the SSPs supported by KIRP through RWHAP program income early intervention funds. This increase has occurred mainly in rural counties where people who inject drugs remain a significant population at risk for new HIV infections. Disclosures All Authors: No reported disclosures.

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)0.002
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 score0.034
Threshold uncertainty score0.068

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.001

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.333
Teacher spread0.300 · 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

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOpen Forum Infectious DiseasesSame topicHIV, Drug Use, Sexual RiskFrench-language works237,207