Publications by authors named "Clay Jones"

3 Publications

  • Page 1 of 1

At-home HIV self-testing during COVID: implementing the GetaKit project in Ottawa.

Can J Public Health 2021 08 17;112(4):587-594. Epub 2021 May 17.

Infectious Diseases and Sexual Health Services, Ottawa Public Health, Ottawa, Canada.

Setting: In March 2020, COVID-19 shuttered access to many healthcare settings offering HIV testing and there is no licensed HIV self-test in Canada.

Intervention: A team of nurses at the University of Ottawa and Ottawa Public Health and staff from the Ontario HIV Treatment Network (OHTN) obtained Health Canada's Special Access approval on April 23, 2020 to distribute bioLytical's INSTI HIV self-test in Ottawa; we received REB approval on May 15, 2020. As of July 20, 2020, eligible participants (≥18 years old, HIV-negative, not on PrEP, not in an HIV vaccine trial, living in Ottawa, no bleeding disorders) could register via to order kits.

Outcomes: In the first 6 weeks, 637 persons completed our eligibility screener; 43.3% (n = 276) were eligible. Of eligible participants, 203 completed a baseline survey and 182 ordered a test. These 203 participants were an average of 31 years old, 72.3% were white, 60.4% were cis-male, and 55% self-identified as gay. Seventy-one percent (n = 144) belonged to a priority group for HIV testing. We have results for 70.9% (n = 129/182) of participants who ordered a kit: none were positive, 104 were negative, 22 were invalid, and 2 "preferred not to say"; 1 participant reported an unreadiness to test.

Implications: Our results show that HIV self-testing is a pandemic-friendly strategy to help ensure access to sexual health services among persons who are good candidates for HIV testing. It is unsurprising that no one tested positive for HIV thus far, given the 0.08% positivity rate for HIV testing in Ottawa. As such, we advocate for scale-up of HIV self-testing in Canada.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source Listing
August 2021

Problems and Progress regarding Sex Bias and Omission in Neuroscience Research.

eNeuro 2017 Nov-Dec;4(6). Epub 2017 Nov 9.

Department of Biological Sciences, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC.

Neuroscience research has historically ignored female animals. This neglect comes in two general forms. The first is sex bias, defined as favoring one sex over another; in this case, male over female. The second is sex omission, which is the lack of reporting sex. The recognition of this phenomenon has generated fierce debate across the sciences. Here we test whether sex bias and omission are still present in the neuroscience literature, whether studies employing both males and females neglect sex as an experimental variable, and whether sex bias and omission differs between animal models and journals. To accomplish this, we analyzed the largest-ever number of neuroscience articles for sex bias and omission: 6636 articles using mice or rats in 6 journals published from 2010 to 2014. Sex omission is declining, as increasing numbers of articles report sex. Sex bias remains present, as increasing numbers of articles report the sole use of males. Articles using both males and females are also increasing, but few report assessing sex as an experimental variable. Sex bias and omission varies substantially by animal model and journal. These findings are essential for understanding the complex status of sex bias and omission in neuroscience research and may inform effective decisions regarding policy action.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source Listing
July 2018

An infant in septic shock.

Clin Pediatr (Phila) 2003 Jan-Feb;42(1):85-7

LSU Health Science Center, Department of Pediatrics, New Orleans, Louisiana, USA.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source Listing
June 2003