No abstract

OurStats (https ://www.cbrc.net/ourst ats) is a data visualization dashboard developed by the Community-Based Research Centre (CBRC) to increase access to data from the Sex Now surveys-Canada's largest community-based surveillance study of gay and bisexual men. An evaluation of the OurStats dashboard was conducted using an online survey distributed through the CBRC and Advance Alliance-an alliance of Canada's leading HIV and queer men's health organizations. Since being launched in November 2019 (through December 2019), 350 unique visitors used the OurStats Dashboard (5.8 per day). Based on responses from 10 community partners, all respondents said they would probably/definitely use OurStats again and would probably/definitely recommend it to colleagues; nine felt it was much/somewhat better than traditional academic outputs (e.g., poster presentations, journal articles); and seven felt it was much/somewhat better than traditional knowledge translation outputs (e.g., fliers, posters, and social media posts). Respondents said they would use OurStats to identify needs of gay and bisexual men (n = 9), prepare grant/funding applications (n = 9), prepare presentations about Sex Now data (n = 7), and evaluate the impact of local programs (n = 4). Overall, half felt that OurStats was somewhat/extremely easy to use and half felt that it was somewhat difficult to use. The most commonly identified requested improvement was to provide help documentation that explained how each of the display settings changed the visualizations. From these findings, we conclude that dynamic visualizations for community-based survey data are highly feasible and acceptable, provided appropriate support is available to help community partners use these tools.

Background In 2018, the Community-Based Research Centre (CBRC) invited gay, bisexual, trans, queer men and Two-Spirit and non-binary people (GBT2Q) at Pride Festivals across Canada to complete in-person Sex Now surveys and provide optional dried blood spot (DBS) samples screening for human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) and hepatitis C virus (HCV). As there is a lack of research evaluating the implementation of DBS sampling for GBT2Q in community settings, we aimed to evaluate this intervention, identifying key facilitators and ongoing challenges to implementing community-based DBS screening for HIV/HCV among GBT2Q. Methods We conducted sixteen one-on-one interviews with individuals involved with the community-based DBS collection protocol, including research staff, site coordinators, and volunteer DBS collectors. Most individuals involved with DBS collection were “peers” (GBT2Q-identified). The Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) guided our data collection and analysis. Results Interviewees felt that DBS collection was a low-barrier, cost-effective, and simple way for peers to quickly screen a large number of Sex Now respondents. Interviewees also noted that the community and peer-based aspects of the research helped drive recruitment of Sex Now respondents. Most interviewees felt that the provision of results took too long, and that some Sex Now respondents would have preferred to receive their test results immediately (e.g., rapid or point-of-care testing). Conclusion Peer-based DBS sampling can be an effective and relatively simple way to screen GBT2Q at Pride Festivals for more than one sexually transmitted and blood borne infection.

Background Gay, bisexual and other men who have sex with men (gbMSM) who attend STI clinics represent an easily accessible population for promoting HIV prevention interventions. We examined characteristics of gbMSM STI clinic attendees to identify those who could most benefit from pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP). Setting GbMSM STI clinic attendees in British Columbia (BC), Canada Methods A clinical electronic charting system of STI clinics in BC was used to identify gbMSM from 2004 to 2017. Incident HIV cases were defined as testers who had at least one HIV-negative test and a subsequent HIV-positive test. Seroconversion rates were calculated by risk factor variables and by year. Cox proportional hazards regression was used to identify independent predictors of HIV seroconversion. Results There were 9,038 gbMSM included, of whom 257 HIV seroconverted over the study period and 8,781 remained negative HIV testers, contributing 650.8 and 29,591.0 person-years to the analysis, respectively. The overall rate of seroconversion was 0.85 per 100 person-years (95% CI: 0.75–0.96). Incidence rates were higher among patients reporting >5 partners in the previous six months, inconsistent condom use, or having a partner living with HIV and who had a previous or concurrent diagnosis of rectal gonorrhea or rectal chlamydia. gbMSM presenting with two STIs such as rectal gonorrhea and syphilis (3.59/100 person-years [95%CI: 2.33–5.22]) or rectal chlamydia and syphilis (3.01/100 person-years [95%CI: 2.00–4.29]) had the highest incidence rates. Conclusion gbMSM with preceding or concurrent rectal STI diagnoses or syphilis had higher rates of HIV seroconversion. The data support the inclusion of specific STI diagnoses as an indication for PrEP.