EXPRESS-PrEP: Evaluating PrEP rapid engagement and same-day start for HIV prevention in gbMSM
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Gay, bisexual, and other men who have sex with men (gbMSM) and transgender women (TGW) remain disproportionately affected by HIV in Canada, yet uptake of pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) is suboptimal. Multi-step clinical pathways and laboratory delays contribute to initiation attrition. This study evaluated the impact of a same-day PrEP initiation model using tenofovir alafenamide/emtricitabine (TAF/FTC) in a Canadian clinic. METHODS: We conducted a prospective, single-site observational cohort at HQ Health Hub in Toronto. Individuals ≥16 years presenting for sexually transmitted and blood-borne infections (STBBI) testing or treatment were screened for PrEP eligibility using a modified HIV Incidence Risk Index (HIRI) score (≥10) or PrEP request. Eligible participants were offered same-day initiation following testing and returned within 24 hours. RESULTS: Of 1766 individuals offered PrEP, 1204 accepted (67.7%), 888 were screened, and 814 (91.7%) initiated within 24 hours. Median age of 31 years (26-34), 67% were non-white, and 94% cis-men. Retention from referred individuals was 66.7% at 6 months and 58.0% at 12 months. Compared to historical norms, more participants remained in care of those referred at 6 months (66.7% vs 31.5%, P <0.001). No serious renal adverse events occurred, and sexually transmitted infection (STI) prevalence did not differ significantly. CONCLUSIONS: Same-day PrEP initiation is safe, feasible, and improves uptake and persistence. Adoption of this model may reduce barriers and accelerate HIV prevention.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".