Improving screening rates for sexually transmitted and blood-borne infections among patients initiating care in a low-barrier addiction medicine clinic: a quality improvement project
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Despite a high prevalence of sexually transmitted and blood-borne infections (STBBIs) among patients with substance use disorders, screening rates in addiction medicine settings are often low. At baseline in our addiction clinic, only 65% of patients were offered screening and only 6% completed screening blood work. This quality improvement project aimed to improve the rate of STBBI screening among new intakes in our clinic by 50%.Interventions included the creation of clinic screening guidelines to include annual screening for all patients for HIV, hepatitis B and C, syphilis, gonorrhoea and chlamydia. Additionally, an on-site phlebotomist was hired. These interventions increased screening rates to an average of 33% with the greatest improvement seen after the addition of the phlebotomist. We found that implementing a bundle of interventions improved rates of screening and detection of STBBIs in a low-barrier addiction medicine clinic. Comprehensive infection prevention, screening and linkage-to-treatment protocols are needed to close gaps in care for this vulnerable patient 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 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 | 0.006 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".