MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4412759809 · doi:10.1136/bmjph-2025-002661

To whom should we prescribe doxy-PEP? A retrospective review of public health surveillance data for bacterial STI diagnoses among gay, bisexual, and other men who have sex with men in Ottawa, Canada

2025· review· en· W4412759809 on OpenAlexaffabout
Patrick O’Byrne, Dara Spatz Friedman, Lauren Orser

Bibliographic record

VenueBMJ Public Health · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicReproductive tract infections research
Canadian institutionsOttawa Public HealthUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMen who have sex with menMedical diagnosisPublic healthMedicineFamily medicineGerontologySyphilisHuman immunodeficiency virus (HIV)Nursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: Increases in bacterial sexually transmitted infections (bac-STIs), such as gonorrhoea, chlamydia and syphilis, have affected gay, bisexual, and other men who have sex with men (gbMSM). A new strategy to prevent bac-STIs involves giving doxycycline as postexposure prophylaxis (doxy-PEP), and research shows that this intervention can prevent chlamydia and syphilis by 70% and gonorrhoea by 33%-50%. Consequently, the US CDC released guidelines in 2024 recommending doxy-PEP for gbMSM with ≥1 bacterial STI diagnosis in the previous 12 months. Methods: We reviewed public health STI surveillance data between 1 January 2021 and 31 December 2024 for gbMSM in Ottawa, Canada, and analysed the number of infections and episodes of infections per person. We estimated the number of individuals who would need doxy-PEP to prevent a single bac-STI episode. Results: During the study period, 1819 unique gbMSM experienced 2834 positive bac-STI testing episodes (PTE), during which 3114 bac-STIs were diagnosed. Consistently, three-quarters of gbMSM did not have a subsequent infection, whether they were diagnosed with 1 infection, 2 infections or ≥3. Considering the average effectiveness of doxy-PEP in this study population, the average number needed to treat (NNT) if doxy-PEP were prescribed to all gbMSM to prevent a first PTE would have been 60. The NNT among those with their first PTE to prevent a second PTE was 8; among those with their second, the NNT was 7. Conclusions: Based on these data, and in alignment with the CDC guidelines, we conclude that doxy-PEP would likely have the most balanced population-level bac-STI prevention effect if given to gbMSM with ≥1 bac-STI diagnosis within the preceding 12 months. Providing doxy-PEP to all gbMSM would likely result in an overuse of antibiotics, and providing doxy-PEP only after a second PTE would result in fewer infections averted for the same proportion treated.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.014
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.446
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0140.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.217
GPT teacher head0.451
Teacher spread0.234 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMJ Public HealthSame topicReproductive tract infections researchFrench-language works237,207