Uptake and Persistence on HIV Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis Among Female Sex Workers and Men Having Sex with Men in Kigali, Rwanda: A Retrospective Cross-Sectional Study Design
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Although HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) is known for its effectiveness in preventing HIV transmission; there is a global rise in HIV infection rates, particularly prominent in sub-Saharan Africa. This health concern is mostly evident among high-risk groups, namely Female Sex Workers (FSWs) and Men who have Sex with Men (MSMs), both of whom are more susceptible to sexually transmissible infections. This research examined the persistence, uptake, and associated predictors of PrEP utilization within the FSW and MSM populations. Methods: A cross-sectional study design was conducted involving 4872 individuals from the FSW and MSM groups who were enrolled in a PrEP program across 10 health centers participating in a pilot initiative. The study population was subject to a year-long follow-up period commencing on March 1st, 2019. To evaluate the determinants of PrEP utilization within FSW and MSM groups, bivariate logistic analyses and multivariate logistic regression models were employed. Results: The findings revealed that the occurrence of PrEP uptake was 45.55% (n=2219) among FSWs and 35.42% (n=17 participants) among MSM. Regarding PrEP persistence, MSM (88.24%, n=15 participants) presented higher PrEP proportion than FSWs (78.5%, n=1742 women). Our findings disclosed that individuals aged 25-34 years (aOR=0.82; 95% CI=0.72-0.93, p=0.002), 35-44 years (aOR=0.83; 95% CI=0.71-0.97, p=0.017), and 55 years and older (OR=0.14; 95% CI=0.04-0.48, p=0.002) exhibited lower likelihoods of having low PrEP uptake than those aged 15-19 years. Moreover, individuals residing with their families (aOR=0.71; 95% CI=0.58-0.87, p<0.001), living with roommates (aOR=0.7; 95% CI=0.5-0.97, p=0.032) displayed lower odds for experiencing low PrEP uptake than their counterparts living alone. Conclusion: This study highlighted the low uptake of PrEP among participants when compared to previous studies. These results revealed significant influences of age and living conditions on PrEP usage.
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.
Direct model labels (unvalidated)
Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.
| Model arm | Categories | Study design | Confidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| gemma | no category Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no | Observational | low |
| gpt | no category Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no | Observational | low |
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 it