Attributes that influence testing decisions for sexually transmitted and blood-borne infections: A qualitative study among diverse people in Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BackgroundSexually transmitted and blood-borne infections (STBBIs) disproportionately affect key populations in Canada. For example, recent estimates suggested that the proportion of people living with hepatitis C is the highest among people who use injection drugs and that gay, bisexual and other men who have sex with men represent a high proportion of new cases of infectious syphilis. Understanding what STBBIs test users and potential testers perceive as important aspects of testing will help inform testing initiatives. We aimed to determine aspects of STBBI testing that are important to a diverse range of key populations in Canada.MethodsWe conducted qualitative interviews and focus groups with people from key populations (gay, bisexual, and other men who have sex with men; African, Caribbean, or Black individuals; Indigenous individuals; sex workers; people who use substances and injection drugs) and people who do not identify as a key population member. We conducted a thematic analysis.ResultsTwo major themes emerged: stigma and inequality, and journey into and through the healthcare system. Within the first theme, participants had diverse perspectives on how aspects of their identity interacted with willingness to seek testing. Within the second theme, participants discussed aspects of testing. Test costs, wait times, and testing accuracy were all viewed as important, but differing perspectives emerged about privacy of testing and receiving results, testing location, and who administers the test.ConclusionsParticipants' perspectives on STBBI testing and willingness to test were informed by their experiences and aspects of their identity.
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 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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".