Approach to sexually transmitted infection testing for men who have sex with men
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To provide a guide on appropriate sexually transmitted infection (STI) testing for primary care providers to use with patients who identify as men who have sex with men (MSM). SOURCES OF INFORMATION: Canadian guidelines for STI testing and enteric and protozoan infections; Ontario guidelines for HIV screening and mpox; and US guidelines for STI testing. MAIN MESSAGE: Across Canada rates of sexually transmitted bacterial, enteric, protozoan, and systemic infections-including HIV and mpox-have been steadily increasing among cisgender and transgender MSM. Despite often having similar clinical presentations, these infections have different incubation periods and testing approaches and must be ruled out effectively to guide diagnosis and treatment for MSM-identifying patients who present with symptoms of various conditions. Clinical information and screening recommendations, however, are often found in multiple guidelines rather than in a single source, thus further complicating these clinical encounters. This document provides a consolidated set of evidence and recommendations for STI testing in MSM. CONCLUSION: Testing approaches for STIs should be comprehensive and based on the patient's reported risk factors and clinical presentation. Where ongoing STI risk is identified and negative laboratory test results are received, MSM should also be counselled on recommendations for repeat screening and HIV prevention services, such as preexposure prophylaxis.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.014 | 0.008 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".