MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4416872806 · doi:10.2196/69961

Brothers Building Brothers by Breaking Barriers: Protocol for a Pilot Trial of a Telehealth Social Capital Intervention for Young Black Sexual Minority Men Living With HIV

2025· article· en· W4416872806 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Marcus O Reed, McKinsey Bullock, Antonio Newman, Srija Dutta, Samuel C O Opara, Tsedenia Tewodros, Kamini Doraivelu, Andrés Camacho-González, Raphiel Murden, Kristi E. Gamarel, Gary W. Harper, Sophia A. Hussen

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Research Protocols · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHIV/AIDS Research and Interventions
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Institute of Allergy and Infectious DiseasesNational Institute on Drug AbuseNational Institute of Mental Health
KeywordsTelehealthIntervention (counseling)Protocol (science)Pilot trialSexual minorityHuman immunodeficiency virus (HIV)Pilot programSocial capitalMen who have sex with men

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Young Black sexual minority men are disproportionately affected by HIV, especially in the Southern United States. To address this, we developed Brothers Building Brothers by Breaking Barriers (B6) intervention with a goal of enhancing social capital and engagement in care among young Black sexual minority men living with HIV. However, we encountered challenges to feasibility in recruiting and engaging for an in-person intervention. OBJECTIVE: The objectives of this study are to iteratively adapt the original B6 intervention for telehealth delivery (Phase 1), and pilot test the intervention through a waitlist-control trial to evaluate its feasibility, acceptability, and safety (Phase 2). METHODS: In Phase 1, we used the assessment, decision, adaptation, production, topical experts, integration, training, and testing (ADAPT-ITT) framework to structure the iterative adaptation process of B6, working with a diverse study team and a Youth Advisory Board (YAB). After completing the preliminary adaptation process, we conducted initial Telehealth Brothers Building Brothers by Breaking Barriers (Tele-B6) pilot testing with a community partner organization. The result was a 5-week group-level intervention, delivered entirely remotely, consisting of a series of adapted activities to address bonding and bridging social capital, affirm intersectional identities, and engage in resilience-building processes. Following feedback integration from pilot-testing, we conducted Phase 2 with 60 young Black sexual minority men living with HIV recruited over the course of one year and who were randomized at the group level to either the immediate intervention or delayed (waitlist control) intervention group. Various data sources will be used to measure feasibility, acceptability, and safety, including surveys, postsession evaluation data, in-depth qualitative interviews, and review of medical records for HIV clinical outcomes. RESULTS: Phase 1, the adaptation process of B6, began in fall 2022 and was completed in spring 2023. Phase 2, the implementation of the waitlist control trial, began in spring 2023 and concluded in summer 2024. Final follow-up assessments were completed in fall 2024 and the results of the mixed methods evaluation are expected in winter 2025. CONCLUSIONS: The adaptation process and telehealth delivery of B6 will add to the knowledge of strengths-based interventions designed to improve care engagement among young Black sexual minority men living with HIV. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05829759,https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT05829759. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/69961.

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)0.032
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.025
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.071
Threshold uncertainty score0.239

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0320.025
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0040.004
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.003
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0060.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0040.003
Research integrity0.0050.008
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0710.009

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 head0.121
GPT teacher head0.537
Teacher spread0.416 · 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 designRandomized trial
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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Research Protocols→Same topicHIV/AIDS Research and Interventions→French-language works237,207→