MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4385668926 · doi:10.2196/47932

Effectiveness, Acceptability, and Feasibility of a Telehealth HIV Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis Care Intervention Among Young Cisgender Men and Transgender Women Who Have Sex With Men: Protocol for a Randomized Controlled Trial

2023· article· en· W4385668926 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Rebecca Braun, Rebecca K Erenrich, Karin Coyle, Thuan-Huong P. Doan, Jeffrey D. Klausner

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Research Protocols · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHIV/AIDS Research and Interventions
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPre-exposure prophylaxisRandomized controlled trialTelehealthMedicineTransgender womenTransgenderMen who have sex with menIntervention (counseling)Human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)Protocol (science)Physical therapyFamily medicineHealth careAlternative medicinePsychologyTelemedicineNursingSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Despite its promise for HIV prevention, the uptake of pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) has been slow, and there have been substantial inequities in PrEP access. Young men who have sex with men and transgender women of color are most in need of PrEP and least likely to have that need fulfilled. PrEP telehealth care, which provides remote PrEP care via electronic communication, seems well suited to address several of the challenges of PrEP provision, including discomfort with stigmatizing and difficult-to-access health care systems, transportation challenges, and privacy concerns, and address disparities in PrEP access. Research suggests that PrEP telehealth care has promise and is a favored option for many prospective recipients of PrEP. However, despite growing attention to telehealth approaches as an avenue for increasing access to PrEP amidst the COVID-19 pandemic, there have been no published randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on PrEP telehealth care to date, making it difficult to draw strong conclusions about the advantages or disadvantages of telehealth compared with usual PrEP care. We developed PrEPTECH, a telehealth intervention that focuses specifically on alleviating issues of stigma, access, cost, and confidentiality for young people with risk factors for HIV infection who are seeking PrEP care. Leveraging data from the 2017 observational pilot study, we redesigned and enhanced PrEPTECH. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to assess the effectiveness, acceptability, and feasibility of a telehealth HIV PrEP care intervention, PrEPTECH, in increasing PrEP uptake. METHODS: This is the protocol for an RCT of young cisgender men and transgender women who have sex with men in 4 regions within the United States: the San Francisco Bay Area, California; Los Angeles County, California; Miami-Dade County, Florida; and Broward County, Florida. Participants in the intervention arm received access to a web-based telehealth program, PrEPTECH, which offers a fully web-based pathway to PrEP, whereas those in the control arm received access to a dynamic web page containing publicly available informational resources about PrEP. Follow-up data collection occurred at 3 and 6 months. An analysis will be conducted on outcomes, including PrEP initiation, persistence, adherence, coverage, and medication prescription, as well as PrEPTECH acceptability and feasibility. RESULTS: The study was funded in 2019 and received institutional review board approval in 2020. The PrEPTECH intervention was developed over the next 1.5 years. Study recruitment was launched in February 2022 and completed in September 2022, with 229 participants recruited in total. Data collection was completed in April 2023. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this RCT will offer valuable evidence regarding the effectiveness, acceptability, and feasibility of telehealth HIV PrEP care interventions among young cisgender men and transgender women who have sex with men. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04902820; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04902820. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): PRR1-10.2196/47932.

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)0.046
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.040
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.071
Threshold uncertainty score0.244

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0460.040
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0070.003
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0120.008
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0040.004
Scholarly communication0.0050.005
Open science0.0040.002
Research integrity0.0090.009
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0710.010

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 head0.090
GPT teacher head0.509
Teacher spread0.419 · 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 designRandomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreProtocol

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

Citations8
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Research Protocols→Same topicHIV/AIDS Research and Interventions→French-language works237,207→