A Multicomponent Intervention (POSSIBLE) to Improve Perceived Risk for HIV Among Black Sexual Minority Men: Feasibility and Preliminary Effectiveness Pilot Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background Increased pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) use is urgently needed to substantially decrease HIV incidence among Black sexual minority men. Low perceived risk for HIV (PRH) is a key unaddressed PrEP barrier for Black sexual minority men. Peers and smartphone apps are popular intervention tools to promote community health behaviors, but few studies have used these together in a multicomponent strategy. Therefore, we designed a multicomponent intervention called POSSIBLE that used an existing smartphone app called PrEPme (Emocha Mobile Health, Inc) and a peer change agent (PCA) to increase PRH as a gateway to PrEP. Objective This paper aims to describe the feasibility and preliminary impact of POSSIBLE on PRH and willingness to accept a PrEP referral among Black sexual minority men. Methods POSSIBLE was a theoretically guided, single-group, 2-session pilot study conducted among Black sexual minority men from Baltimore, Maryland between 2019 and 2021 (N=69). POSSIBLE integrated a PCA and the PrEPme app that allows users to self-monitor sexual risk behaviors and chat with the in-app community health worker to obtain PrEP service information. PRH was assessed using the 8-item PRH scale before and after baseline and follow-up study visits. At the end of each study visit, the PCA referred interested individuals to the community health worker to learn more about PrEP service options. Results The average age of participants was 32.5 (SD 8.1, range 19-62) years. In total, 55 (80%) participants were retained for follow-up at month 1. After baseline sessions, 29 (42%) participants were willing to be referred to PrEP services, 20 (69%) of those confirmed scheduled appointments with PrEP care teams. There were no statistically significant differences in PRH between baseline and follow-up visits (t122=–1.36; P=.17). Conclusions We observed no statistically significant improvement in PRH between baseline and month 1. However, given the high retention rate and acceptability, POSSIBLE may be feasible to implement. Future research should test a statistically powered peer-based approach on PrEP initiation among Black sexual minority men. Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04533386; https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT04533386
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 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 | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".