MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4386834225 · doi:10.2196/51023

Online-Mediated HIV Pre-exposure Prophylaxis Care and Reduced Monitoring Frequency for Men Who Have Sex With Men: Protocol for a Randomized Controlled Noninferiority Trial (EZI-PrEP Study)

2023· article· en· W4386834225 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
M.L. Groot Bruinderink, Anders Boyd, Liza Coyer, Sophie Boers, Laura Blitz, Jean-Marie Brand, Hannelore M Götz, Martijn Stip, Joey Woudstra, Kenneth Yap, Koenraad Vermey, Amy Matser, Allard R. Feddes, Vita W. Jongen, Maria Prins, Elske Hoornenborg, Frenk van Harreveld, Maarten F. Schim van der Loeff, Udi Davidovich

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Research Protocols · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHIV/AIDS Research and Interventions
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePre-exposure prophylaxisMen who have sex with menEmtricitabineRandomized controlled trialFamily medicineHuman immunodeficiency virus (HIV)Viral loadInternal medicineAntiretroviral therapy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Daily and event-driven HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) with oral tenofovir-emtricitabine is highly effective to prevent HIV in men who have sex with men (MSM). PrEP care generally consists of in-clinic monitoring every 3 months that includes PrEP dispensing, counseling, and screening for HIV and sexually transmitted infections (STIs). However, the optimal frequency for monitoring remains undetermined. Attending a clinic every 3 months for monitoring may be a barrier for PrEP. Online-mediated PrEP care and reduced frequency of monitoring may lower this barrier. OBJECTIVE: The primary objective of this study is to establish the noninferiority of online PrEP care (vs in-clinic care) and monitoring every 6 months (vs every 3 months). The secondary objectives are to (1) examine differences between PrEP care modalities regarding incidences of STIs, HIV infection, and hepatitis C virus infection; retention in PrEP care; intracellular tenofovir-diphosphate concentration; and satisfaction, usability, and acceptability of PrEP care modalities; and (2) evaluate associations of these study outcomes with sociodemographic, behavioral, and psychological characteristics. METHODS: This study is a 2×2 factorial, 4-arm, open-label, multi-center, randomized, controlled, noninferiority trial. The 4 arms are (1) in-clinic monitoring every 3 months, (2) in-clinic monitoring every 6 months, (3) online monitoring every 3 months, and (4) online monitoring every 6 months. The primary outcome is a condomless anal sex act with a casual partner not covered or insufficiently covered by PrEP (ie, "unprotected act") as a proxy for HIV infection risk. Eligible individuals are MSM, and transgender and gender diverse people aged ≥18 years who are eligible for PrEP care at 1 of 4 participating sexual health centers in the Netherlands. The required sample size is 442 participants, and the planned observation time is 24 months. All study participants will receive access to a smartphone app, which contains a diary. Participants are requested to complete the diary on a daily basis during the first 18 months of participation. Participants will complete questionnaires at baseline and 6, 12, 18, and 24 months. Dried blood spots will be collected at 6 and 12 months for assessment of intracellular tenofovir-diphosphate concentration. Incidence rates of unprotected acts will be compared between the online and in-clinic arms, and between the 6-month and 3-month arms. Noninferiority will be concluded if the upper limit of the 2-sided 97.5% CI of the incidence rate ratio is <1.8. RESULTS: The results of the main analysis are expected in 2024. CONCLUSIONS: This trial will demonstrate whether online PrEP care and monitoring every 6 months is noninferior to standard PrEP care in terms of PrEP adherence. If noninferiority is established, these modalities may lower barriers for initiating and continuing PrEP use and potentially reduce the systemic burden for PrEP providers. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05093036; https://tinyurl.com/28b8ndvj. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/51023.

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)0.026
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.021
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 score0.067
Threshold uncertainty score0.224

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0260.021
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0070.003
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0120.005
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0030.004
Scholarly communication0.0040.004
Open science0.0040.002
Research integrity0.0090.008
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0670.011

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 head0.124
GPT teacher head0.529
Teacher spread0.404 · 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→