MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4393986699 · doi:10.1080/13557858.2024.2337623

Perspectives on digital testing services for sexually transmitted and blood-borne infections from Two-Spirit, gay, bisexual, transgender, and other queer Black, Indigenous, people of colour living in Ontario, Canada

2024· article· en· W4393986699 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Joshun Dulai, Abdi Hassan, MacKenzie Stewart, Heeho Ryu, Praney Anand, Catherine Worthington, Mark Gilbert, Daniel Grace

Bibliographic record

VenueEthnicity and Health · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHIV/AIDS Research and Interventions
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaUniversity of VictoriaBC Centre for Disease ControlPublic Health OntarioUniversity of Toronto
FundersAl-Amodi Autism Research Chair, King Saud UniversityCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchDoctoral Scientific Research Starting Foundation of Baoji University of Arts and ScienceNewfoundland and Labrador Centre for Applied Health Research
KeywordsTransgenderQueerIndigenousHuman sexualityPopulationGender studiesMedicineGerontologySociologyEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: Increased sexually transmitted and blood-borne infections (STBBI) testing can reduce the burden of disease among Two-Spirit, gay, bisexual, transgender, and other queer Black, Indigenous, people of colour (2SGBTQ+ BIPOC). However, this population encounters barriers, such as discrimination, when accessing in-person STBBI testing services. Digital STBBI testing, such as self-testing/collection kits ordered online and digital requisitions, may address some of these barriers. Our aim was to understand acceptability of free digital STBBI testing among 2SGBTQ+ BIPOC living in Ontario, Canada. DESIGN: We approached this analysis using Implementation Science and Critical Race Theory. We conducted interviews and focus groups with 21 2SGBTQ + BIPOC individuals from 2020-2021. Participants were asked about their perceptions of the benefits and drawbacks of digital STBBI testing, populations that would benefit from using these services, and recommendations for how these services may be implemented in Ontario. Interviews and focus groups were transcribed verbatim and analyzed using reflexive thematic analysis. RESULTS: Six themes emerged. Digital STBBI testing services: (1) May reduce oppression experienced by 2SGBTQ + BIPOC when testing in-person; (2) Should address the unique needs that 2SGBTQ + BIPOC experience due to other intersecting identities they possess; (3) Should adapt their services to suit the varying cultural contexts and living circumstances of 2SGBTQ + BIPOC; (4) Should be accessible to 2SGBTQ + BIPOC who hold diverse or no documentation; (5) Should be offered in multiple languages; (6) May be inaccessible to those without Internet access or devices. CONCLUSION: Digital STBBI testing is one strategy that may reduce discrimination experienced by 2SGBTQ + BIPOC when getting tested in-person. However, digital STBBI testing services may not address all the needs of 2SGBTQ + BIPOC. Racism and other forms of oppression embedded into in-person and digital testing services will need to be addressed to meet the needs of this diverse population.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.248
Threshold uncertainty score0.474

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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.

Opus teacher head0.070
GPT teacher head0.368
Teacher spread0.298 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations2
Published2024
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEthnicity and HealthSame topicHIV/AIDS Research and InterventionsFrench-language works237,207