MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4414950218 · doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2025-107054

Advancing HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) implementation in Canada: a scoping review protocol of programmes, practices and policies

2025· review· en· W4414950218 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Debapriya Chakraborty, Pascal Djiadeu, Carolyn Ziegler, Amani Chabikuli, Ezinne Ifeanacho, Moyo Awoliyi, Hannah Zuta, Graziella Djuidje De Pandja, LaRon E. Nelson, Sean B. Rourke, Wale Ajiboye

Bibliographic record

VenueBMJ Open · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHIV/AIDS Research and Interventions
Canadian institutionsPublic Health OntarioUniversity of TorontoMcMaster University
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsProtocol (science)Human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)Health services researchPublic healthMEDLINEPre-exposure prophylaxisHealth policy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) is an effective HIV prevention tool, reducing infection risk by up to 99% when used as prescribed. Despite its proven efficacy, PrEP uptake remains suboptimal, particularly among high-risk populations in Canada. Barriers to access and uptake, including stigma, financial constraints and healthcare accessibility, persist, highlighting the need for targeted interventions. The objective of this scoping review is to identify and map the extent and types of interventions, programmes, practices and policies aimed at increasing the acceptance, access, uptake and sustained use of HIV PrEP in Canada. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This review will use the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) Scoping Review methodology. Databases to be searched are MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, Cochrane Library, CINAHL, Scopus and Web of Science from 2016 onwards. Two independent reviewers will screen studies, based on the inclusion criteria. The search results will be presented in a Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses flow diagram. Data will be extracted from relevant studies by two independent reviewers and summarised to inform future research and policy development. This review will include studies focusing on individuals in Canada who are eligible for or using PrEP for HIV prevention. The interventions considered will address the awareness, acceptance, access, uptake and sustained use of PrEP. Studies must be set within the Canadian context, considering geographic, cultural and systemic factors. Exclusions include studies conducted outside Canada or those not addressing HIV prevention interventions. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: . The findings of this research will be shared through peer-reviewed journal articles, conference presentations and may be relevant to governmental health agencies and local HIV/AIDS service organisations. REGISTRATION: The protocol has been registered with Open Science Framework at https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/C7S4Z.

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)0.103
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.087
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 score0.954
Threshold uncertainty score0.546

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.1030.087
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0040.005
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0120.013
Bibliometrics0.0260.026
Science and technology studies0.0090.006
Scholarly communication0.0100.008
Open science0.0070.007
Research integrity0.0070.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0560.010

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 head0.096
GPT teacher head0.572
Teacher spread0.476 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMJ Open→Same topicHIV/AIDS Research and Interventions→French-language works237,207→