Syphilis Point of Care Rapid Test and Immediate Treatment Evaluation (SPRITE) study: a mixed-methods implementation science research protocol of eight public health units in Ontario, Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Urgent, tailored and equitable action is needed to address the alarming rise in syphilis rates in Canada. In the last decade, the rates of infectious syphilis have increased by 345% in Ontario, Canada. Underserved populations-people who use drugs, un(der)housed individuals and those living in rural and remote areas-face unique social and healthcare challenges that increase their vulnerability to syphilis infections and hinder their access to timely diagnosis and treatment. This study assesses the real-world implementation and effectiveness of using a recently approved syphilis point-of-care test in conjunction with public health outreach to break barriers and bring services to the population at the highest risk. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The Syphilis Rapid Point-of-Care Testing and Immediate Treatment Evaluation (SPRITE) study includes eight public health units in Ontario, Canada. Implementation and evaluation of this rapid 'test and treat' outreach model of care will be assessed using the Practical, Robust Implementation and Sustainability Model (PRISM)/Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation, Maintenance (RE-AIM) Framework, following a community-based participatory approach. Network models will be used to estimate the population-level impact of implementing this model of care to curb transmission. Knowledge mobilisation will be assessed using the Reciprocity, Externalities, Access, and Partnership (REAP) Self-Assessment Model. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The SPRITE study was approved by the Queen's University Research Ethics Board (REB) and is to be conducted in accordance with the Canadian Tri-Council Policy Statement V.2 and the latest Seoul revision of the Declaration of Helsinki. Knowledge generated from this study will be mobilised through community-based organisations and the broader public health community.
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 | 0.009 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".