Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27866750›Full record

ArticleSocial science & medicine (1982)2017

Distinguishing hypothetical willingness from behavioral intentions to initiate HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP): Findings from a large cohort of gay and bisexual men in the U.S.

H Jonathon Rendina, Thomas H F Whitfield, Christian Grov, Tyrel J Starks, Jeffrey T Parsons

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Social science & medicine (1982), 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 64 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
64citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
7.4field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
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

64 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 88 citations in OpenAlex.

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

4 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

H Jonathon RendinaDepartment of Psychology, Hunter College of the City University of New York (CUNY), New York, NY, United States; Center for HIV/AIDS Educational Studies & Training, Hunter College of the City University of New York (CUNY), New York, NY, United States; Health Psychology and Clinical Sciences Doctoral Program, The Graduate Center of the City University of New York (CUNY), New York, NY, United States.
Thomas H F WhitfieldCenter for HIV/AIDS Educational Studies & Training, Hunter College of the City University of New York (CUNY), New York, NY, United States; Health Psychology and Clinical Sciences Doctoral Program, The Graduate Center of the City University of New York (CUNY), New York, NY, United States.
Christian GrovCenter for HIV/AIDS Educational Studies & Training, Hunter College of the City University of New York (CUNY), New York, NY, United States; CUNY Graduate School of Public Health and Health Policy, New York, NY, United States.
Tyrel J StarksDepartment of Psychology, Hunter College of the City University of New York (CUNY), New York, NY, United States; Center for HIV/AIDS Educational Studies & Training, Hunter College of the City University of New York (CUNY), New York, NY, United States; Health Psychology and Clinical Sciences Doctoral Program, The Graduate Center of the City University of New York (CUNY), New York, NY, United States.
Jeffrey T ParsonsDepartment of Psychology, Hunter College of the City University of New York (CUNY), New York, NY, United States; Center for HIV/AIDS Educational Studies & Training, Hunter College of the City University of New York (CUNY), New York, NY, United States; Health Psychology and Clinical Sciences Doctoral Program, The Graduate Center of the City University of New York (CUNY), New York, NY, United States. Electronic address: Jeffrey.Parsons@hunter.cuny.edu.
The Graduate Center, CUNY · US

Funding

Disparities in COVID Disease Severity and Outcomes in New York CityUL1TR002384 · NCATS · WEILL MEDICAL COLL OF CORNELL UNIV · PI JULIANNE L IMPERATO-MCGINLEY · 2017 to 2026
$86.2M
Virology and Molecular Biomarkers CoreP30AI050409 · NIAID · EMORY UNIVERSITY · PI Carlos del Rio · 2002 to 2026
$74.0M
Syndemics and resilience for HIV transmission in a national sample of vulnerableR01DA036466 · NIDA · HUNTER COLLEGE · PI GROV, CHRISTIAN, RENDINA, H. JONATHON · 2013 to 2017
$3.4M
Developing a mobile emotion regulation intervention for HIV-positive menK01DA039030 · NIDA · HUNTER COLLEGE · PI RENDINA, H. JONATHON · 2015 to 2018
$743k
NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR002384NIAID NIH HHS P30 AI050409NIDA NIH HHS K01 DA039030NIDA NIH HHS R01 DA036466
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

rationaleMuch of the data on the acceptability of HIV Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis (PrEP) is based on willingness to take PrEP (i.e., hypothetical receptivity) rather than actual intentions (i.e., planned behavioral action) to do so.

objectiveWe sought to examine differences between hypothetical willingness and behavioral intentions to begin PrEP in a national sample of gay and bisexual men (GBM) across the U.S.

methodsWe utilized data collected in 2015 to examine differences between those Unwilling (42.6% n = 375), Willing but not intending (41.4%, n = 365), and willing and Intending to take PrEP (15.9%, n = 140) in a multivariable, multinomial logistic regression.

resultsMen with less education had higher odds of Intending to take PrEP. Compared to men unsure about PrEP's efficacy, those who believed PrEP was at least 90% efficacious had higher odds of Intending to take PrEP. Those who saw themselves as appropriate candidates for PrEP had higher odds of Intending to take PrEP while those who saw themselves as inappropriate candidates for PrEP had lower odds of Intending to take PrEP in comparison to men unsure if they were appropriate candidates. Increased motivation for condom non-use because of perceived sexual pressure by partners was associated with higher odds of Intending to take PrEP. The groups did not differ by risk behavior nor recent STI diagnosis.

conclusionsOverall, the distinction between willingness and intentions to take PrEP was meaningful and may help explain disparities between PrEP acceptability and uptake. While much of the literature has focused on hypothetical willingness to take PrEP, these results highlight the importance of simultaneously assessing willingness and intentions when examining correspondence with uptake and developing interventions to increase PrEP uptake.

Indexed as

IntentionAdolescentAdultAgedAntiviral AgentsBisexualityHIV InfectionsHomosexuality, MaleHumansLogistic ModelsMaleMiddle AgedMotivationPre-Exposure ProphylaxisRisk-TakingSexual BehaviorAntiviral AgentsBehavioral intentionsGay and bisexual menHIV preventionPre-exposure prophylaxisPrEPUptake

Identifiers

PMID27866750
PMCPMC5154860
OpenAlexW2556187624

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.