Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27492141›Full record

ArticleHIV medicine2017

Preparedness for use of the rapid result HIV self-test by gay men and other men who have sex with men (MSM): a mixed methods exploratory study among MSM and those involved in HIV prevention and care.

P Flowers, J Riddell, C Park, B Ahmed, I Young, J Frankis, M Davis, M Gilbert, C Estcourt, L Wallace and 1 more

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in HIV medicine, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 52 papers, 7 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
52citing papers in PubMed, 7 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, 7 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Trial
  13. Trial
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
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

11 authors.

P FlowersSchool of Health and Life Sciences, Glasgow Caledonian University, Glasgow, UK.
J RiddellMRC/CSO Social and Public Health Sciences Unit, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK.
C ParkSchool of Health and Life Sciences, Glasgow Caledonian University, Glasgow, UK.
B AhmedSchool of Health and Life Sciences, Glasgow Caledonian University, Glasgow, UK.
I YoungMRC/CSO Social and Public Health Sciences Unit, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK.
J FrankisSchool of Health and Life Sciences, Glasgow Caledonian University, Glasgow, UK.
M DavisSchool of Social Sciences, Monash University, Melbourne, Vic., Australia.
M GilbertApplied Epidemiology Unit, Ontario HIV Treatment Network, Toronto, ON, Canada.
C EstcourtBarts and the London School of Medicine and Dentistry, Barts Sexual Health Centre, Blizard Institute, London, UK.
L WallaceHealth Protection Scotland, Glasgow, UK.
L M McDaidMRC/CSO Social and Public Health Sciences Unit, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK.

Funding

Medical Research Council MC_UU_12017/11Medical Research Council MC_UU_12017/2
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesThe aim of the study was to explore preparedness for the HIV self-test among men who have sex with men (MSM) and those involved in HIV prevention and care.

methodsA mixed methods exploratory research design was employed, detailing awareness and willingness to use the self-test and the perceived barriers and facilitators to implementation. Quantitative and qualitative data collection and analysis were completed in parallel. Descriptive and inferential analysis of cross-sectional bar-based survey data collected from MSM through a self-completed questionnaire and oral fluid specimen collection (n = 999) was combined with qualitative, thematic, analysis of data collected through 12 expert focus groups (n = 55) consisting of gay men, National Health Service (NHS) staff, community organizations, entrepreneurs and activists. Findings were subsequently combined and assessed for synergies.

resultsAmong MSM, self-test awareness was moderate (55%). Greater awareness was associated with increased educational attainment [adjusted odds ratio 1.51; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.00-2.30; P = 0.05] and previous history of sexually transmitted infection (STI) testing (adjusted odds ratio 1.63; 95% CI 1.11-2.39; P = 0.01). Willingness to use the test was high (89%) and associated with meeting sexual partners online (unadjusted odds ratio 1.96; 95% CI 1.31-2.94; P < 0.001). Experts highlighted the overall acceptability of self-testing; it was understood as convenient, discreet, accessible, and with a low burden to services. However, some ambivalence towards self-testing was reported; it could reduce opportunities to engage with wider services, wider health issues and the determinants of risk.

conclusionsSelf-testing represents an opportunity to reduce barriers to HIV testing and enhance prevention and access to care. Levels of awareness are moderate but willingness to use is high. Self-testing may amplify health inequalities.

Indexed as

Health Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticeSexual and Gender MinoritiesAdolescentAdultAgedAged, 80 and overCross-Sectional StudiesDiagnostic Tests, RoutineHIV InfectionsHomosexuality, MaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedSelf-ExaminationSurveys and QuestionnairesTime FactorsHIV preventionHIV testingmen who have sex with mensexual healthsexual risk behaviour

Identifiers

PMID27492141
PMCPMC5347967

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.