MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6904787061 · doi:10.14288/1.0435279

Health equity analysis of awareness of GetCheckedOnline in communities outside Vancouver, British Columbia

2025· article· en· W6904787061 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenuecIRcle (University of British Columbia) · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicData-Driven Disease Surveillance
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPublic healthHealth equityEquity (law)Government (linguistics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: Digital interventions for sexually transmitted and blood-borne infections (STBBI) testing are one strategy to overcome barriers to accessing provider-based testing. Despite evidence of overall effectiveness, these interventions might replicate existing health inequities. Exploring awareness of services as an implementation outcome can assist in understanding differential uptake by potential users, yet few studies have assessed service awareness. GetCheckedOnline is a digital intervention for STBBI testing in British Columbia (BC), Canada. This study evaluates awareness of GetCheckedOnline in communities where it is available outside Vancouver from a health equity perspective. Methods: From July to September 2022, a survey evaluated awareness, reported use and intention to use GetCheckedOnline in Kamloops, Kimberley, Maple Ridge, Nelson and Greater Victoria, BC, using online and in-person recruitment and oversampling of populations known to face barriers to testing. The implementation outcome of awareness was analyzed through Directed-acyclic graphs (DAG) informed logistic regression modelling to examine differences according to age, gender identity, race/ethnicity, sexual identity, educational attainment, and income. Intersections between gender and race/ethnicity and sexual identity and ethnicity were also studied. Results: The final sample included 1,658 participants, of whom a large proportion comprised members of equity-owed populations. Overall awareness was 36%, with 56% of those aware having used the service (20% of the total sample). A higher likelihood of awareness was found in participants identifying outside the man/woman gender binary, transgender participants, non-heterosexual people, Indigenous individuals and People of Color. A lower likelihood of awareness was found in the lower income group and people aged outside the range of 25 to 29 years. Discussion: This health equity analysis showed that the overall proportion of 1 in 3 people surveyed being aware of the service is not equally distributed in the communities studied. The pattern of awareness distribution in the sample, in some cases, favoured equity-owed groups, while other observed differences favoured more privileged groups. These findings can provide guidance for service promotion, including the identification of populations for whom it is necessary to evaluate the appropriateness of GetCheckedOnline to ensure the service can be used to overcome barriers and meet population testing needs.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.130

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.000
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.263
Teacher spread0.247 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuecIRcle (University of British Columbia)Same topicData-Driven Disease SurveillanceFrench-language works237,207