Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27286296›Full record

ReviewAIDS patient care and STDs2016

The Potential of Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis for Women in Violent Relationships.

Amy Braksmajer, Theresa E Senn, James McMahon

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in AIDS patient care and STDs, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 52 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
52citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

52 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. "African journal of AIDS research : AJAR · 2022
    Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Amy BraksmajerUniversity of Rochester School of Nursing , Rochester, New York.
Theresa E SennUniversity of Rochester School of Nursing , Rochester, New York.
James McMahonUniversity of Rochester School of Nursing , Rochester, New York.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

HIV and intimate partner violence (IPV) are significant intersecting threats to women's health. Women in violent relationships have few feasible HIV risk reduction options as traditional prevention methods are largely dependent on a partner's cooperation. The purpose of this review is to explore potential benefits and drawbacks of pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) use among women in the United States experiencing IPV. Advantages of PrEP use in this population include the potential for covert or autonomous use, coital independence, dual protection against sexual and injection risk, and facilitated connections to social services. A number of barriers, however, may interfere with the effective use of PrEP, including partner resistance, cost, frequent medical visits, gendered norms regarding sexuality, and stigma. To realize its potential for women in violent relationships, it will be necessary to incorporate PrEP into behavioral and structural interventions that encourage uptake, facilitate adherence, ensure women's safety, and challenge existing gender norms.

Indexed as

Intimate Partner ViolencePre-Exposure ProphylaxisRisk Reduction BehaviorSexual PartnersSpouse AbuseAdultAnti-HIV AgentsFemaleGender IdentityHIV InfectionsHumansInterpersonal RelationsSexual BehaviorSocial StigmaUnited StatesAnti-HIV Agents

Identifiers

PMID27286296
PMCPMC4913495

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.