MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4408447247 · doi:10.2196/58976

Improving Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis Provision as Part of Routine Gynecologic Care Among Black Cisgender Women (Project PrEP4Her): Protocol for the Implementation of an Intervention

2025· article· en· W4408447247 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Maira Sohail, Lynn T. Matthews, Audra Williams, Mirjam-Colette Kempf, Desiree Phillips, Hannah Goymer, Bernadette Johnson, Michael J. Mugavero, Latesha Elopre

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Research Protocols · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHIV/AIDS Research and Interventions
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Institute of Mental Health
KeywordsPre-exposure prophylaxisMedicineFamily medicineMedical prescriptionHealth careProtocol (science)Reproductive healthIntervention (counseling)Focus groupHuman immunodeficiency virus (HIV)NursingMen who have sex with menPopulationAlternative medicineEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Although HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) has been proven to be an effective prevention tool in decreasing HIV transmission, achieving adequate PrEP uptake has remained a challenge among Black cisgender women living in the Southern United States. Gynecology clinics, which provide primary health care services for many cisgender women, have the potential to be an ideal setting for the integration of PrEP services. OBJECTIVE: We designed an intervention, PrEP4Her, which aims to implement PrEP service delivery at gynecology clinics in Alabama, the United States, as part of routine reproductive and sexual health care visits to improve PrEP engagement rates among Black cisgender women. METHODS: Guided by the information gathered on (1) factors impacting PrEP implementation at gynecology clinics, including key barriers and facilitators to PrEP implementation and potential strategies to address the identified barriers (in-depth interviews with the gynecology care team), (2) structural barriers and provider-level barriers to PrEP implementation (cross-sectional study among gynecologists), and (3) implementation strategies on how to integrate PrEP services into routine gynecology care (in-depth interviews and focus groups with Black cisgender women), a multicomponent implementation strategy, tailored for Black cisgender women, was developed to integrate PrEP in routine women's health visits (ie, PrEP4Her). To determine the efficacy of the program, we will measure implementation outcomes, reach (increase in the absolute number of Black cisgender women receiving PrEP prescriptions), effectiveness (increase in the proportion of PrEP prescriptions over time), and adoption (proportion of team members willing to implement PrEP4Her) using the RE-AIM (Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation, and Maintenance) framework. In addition, acceptability (the extent to which providers and Black cisgender women feel PrEP4Her to be acceptable-in-depth interviews); Feasibility (appropriateness of PrEP4Her for a larger, full-scale trial-the Feasibility of Intervention Measure scale); and fidelity (the degree to which PrEP4Her program was implemented as designed-electronic survey with patients) will also be assessed. RESULTS: The qualitative and quantitative data from the gynecology care team and the qualitative data from Black cisgender women were collected from August 9, 2022, to April 19, 2023, and were integrated through joint displays to identify major themes. The combined findings provided a comprehensive understanding of factors that were fundamental in the development and refinement of PrEP4Her implementation. The PrEP4Her was implemented from January 29, 2024, to August 16, 2024. The information gathered is being used to assess PrEP4Her efficacy (based on reach, effectiveness, adoption, acceptability, feasibility, and fidelity). CONCLUSIONS: Upon completion of our research, our interdisciplinary team, which includes experts in infectious diseases, implementation science, community-engaged research, and psychology, will be primed to lead a multisite type III implementation trial for PrEP service delivery at gynecology clinics across the Southern United States. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/58976.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.032
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.021
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.067
Threshold uncertainty score0.224

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0320.021
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0040.003
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.004
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0070.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0040.004
Research integrity0.0060.008
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0670.012

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 head0.111
GPT teacher head0.571
Teacher spread0.460 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreProtocol

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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Research Protocols→Same topicHIV/AIDS Research and Interventions→French-language works237,207→