MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4415245393 · doi:10.1080/15381501.2025.2572602

Strategies to overcome barriers and enhance PrEP adoption among primary care providers in urban–rural communities outside Canada’s major metropolitan areas

2025· article· en· W4415245393 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Beatriz Alvarado, Oluwatoyosi Kuforiji, Nicholas Cofie, Emma Nagy, Bradley P. Stoner, Nancy Dalgarno, Jorge Martínez-Cajas, Pilar Camargo‐Plazas

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of HIV & Social Services · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGlobal Maternal and Child Health
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
FundersOntario HIV Treatment Network
KeywordsMetropolitan areaPrimary carePrimary health careHealth careQualitative research

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) in Ontario remains concentrated in large cities, leaving smaller urban and rural communities underserved. To inform targeted expansion, we interviewed 28 primary care providers (family physicians, trainees, public health nurses, clinic managers, and practice leads) working outside major metropolitan areas. Recruitment used multiple outreach methods, and interviews were transcribed and thematically analyzed. Half of participants had direct PrEP experience. Providers cited limited training, knowledge gaps, few continuing-education opportunities, staffing shortages, and lack of administrative support as barriers. Structural forces, stigma, high costs, transportation barriers, further limited access, intersecting with poverty, racism, and substance use, and affecting equity-deserving groups beyond gay and bisexual men. Participants recommended province-wide competency-based training, task-sharing through medical directives, normalization of PrEP in clinical discussions, broader awareness campaigns, and nurse-led models. Findings highlight the need to strengthen provider capacity while addressing social determinants to achieve equitable PrEP uptake outside Ontario’s major cities.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.283
Threshold uncertainty score0.479

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.250 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations3
Published2025
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of HIV & Social ServicesSame topicGlobal Maternal and Child HealthFrench-language works237,207