Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30306439›Full record

Trial reportAIDS and behavior2019

The Context of Sexual Risk Behaviour Among Men Who Have Sex with Men Seeking PrEP, and the Impact of PrEP on Sexual Behaviour.

Mitzy Gafos, Rob Horne, Will Nutland, Gill Bell, Caroline Rae, Sonali Wayal, Michael Rayment, Amanda Clarke, Gabriel Schembri, Richard Gilson and 11 more

Open access · hybridAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in AIDS and behavior, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 39 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
39citing papers in PubMed
4.9field-weighted citation impact, top 4% 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

39 citing papers in PubMed, 74 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Contextualized Experiences and Predictors of Condom Use in a Flemish Population: A Mixed Methods Study.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2024
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. 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

21 authors at 10 institutions in 1 country.

Mitzy GafosLondon School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, UK. mitzy.gafos@lshtm.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7894-1498
Rob HorneSchool of Pharmacy, University College London, London, UK.
Will NutlandPrepster, London, UK.
Gill BellSheffield Health, Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Sheffield, UK.
Caroline RaeChelsea and Westminster Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
Sonali WayalCentre for Population Research in Sexual Health and HIV, Mortimer Market Centre, Institute for Global Health, UCL, London, UK.
Michael RaymentChelsea and Westminster Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
Amanda ClarkeClaude Nicol Centre, Royal Sussex County Hospital, Brighton, UK.
Gabriel SchembriManchester Centre for Sexual Health, Central Manchester University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, UK.
Richard GilsonThe Mortimer Market Centre, Institute for Global Health, University College London, London, UK.
Alan McOwanChelsea and Westminster Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
Ann SullivanChelsea and Westminster Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
Julie FoxGuy's and St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
Vanessa ApeaAmbrose King Centre, Barts Health NHS Trust, London, UK.
Claire DewsnapSheffield Health, Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Sheffield, UK.
David DollingMedical Research Council Clinical Trials Unit, Institute of Clinical Trials and Methodology, University College London, London, UK.
Ellen WhiteMedical Research Council Clinical Trials Unit, Institute of Clinical Trials and Methodology, University College London, London, UK.
Elizabeth BrodnickiMedical Research Council Clinical Trials Unit, Institute of Clinical Trials and Methodology, University College London, London, UK.
Gemma WoodMedical Research Council Clinical Trials Unit, Institute of Clinical Trials and Methodology, University College London, London, UK.
David DunnMedical Research Council Clinical Trials Unit, Institute of Clinical Trials and Methodology, University College London, London, UK.
Sheena McCormackMedical Research Council Clinical Trials Unit, Institute of Clinical Trials and Methodology, University College London, London, UK.
Chelsea and Westminster Hospital NHS Foundation Trust · GBMRC Clinical Trials Unit at UCL · GBMortimer Market Centre · GBSheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust · GBBarts Health NHS Trust · GBGuy's and St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust · GBLondon School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine · GBRoyal Sussex County Hospital · GBUniversity College London · GBUniversity of Manchester · GB

Funding

Medical Research Council MC_UU_12023/1Medical Research Council MC_UU_12023/23
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

There are still important gaps in our understanding of how people will incorporate PrEP into their existing HIV prevention strategies. In this paper, we explore how PrEP use impacted existing sexual risk behaviours and risk reduction strategies using qualitative data from the PROUD study. From February 2014 to January 2016, we conducted 41 in-depth interviews with gay, bisexual and other men who have sex with men (GBMSM) enrolled in the PROUD PrEP study at sexual health clinics in England. The interviews were conducted in English and were audio-recorded. The recordings were transcribed, coded and analysed using framework analysis. In the interviews, we explored participants' sexual behaviour before joining the study and among those using or who had used PrEP, changes to sexual behaviour after starting PrEP. Participants described the risk behaviour and management strategies before using PrEP, which included irregular condom use, sero-sorting, and strategic positioning. Participants described their sexual risk taking before initiating PrEP in the context of the sexualised use of drugs, geographical spaces linked with higher risk sexual norms, and digitised sexual networking, as well as problematic psychological factors that exacerbated risk taking. The findings highlight that in the main, individuals who were already having frequent condomless sex, added PrEP to the existing range of risk management strategies, influencing the boundaries of the 'rules' for some but not all. While approximately half the participants reduced other risk reduction strategies after starting PrEP, the other half did not alter their behaviours. PrEP provided an additional HIV prevention option to a cohort of GBMSM at high risk of HIV due to inconsistent use of other prevention options. In summary, PrEP provides a critical and necessary additional HIV prevention option that individuals can add to existing strategies in order to enhance protection, at least from HIV. As a daily pill, PrEP offers protection in the context of the sex cultures associated with sexualised drug use, digitised sexual applications and shifting social norms around sexual fulfilment and risk taking. PrEP can offer short or longer-term options for individuals as their sexual desires change over their life course offering protection from HIV during periods of heightened risk. PrEP should not be perceived or positioned in opposition to the existing HIV prevention toolkit, but rather as additive and as a tool that can and is having a substantial impact on HIV.

Indexed as

Health Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticePre-Exposure ProphylaxisAdolescentAdultAnti-HIV AgentsEnglandFemaleHIV InfectionsHomosexuality, MaleHumansMaleUnsafe SexAnti-HIV AgentsGay and other MSMHIV preventionPre-exposure prophylaxisPrEPRisk compensationSexual risk behaviourUK

Identifiers

PMID30306439
PMCPMC6570678
OpenAlexW2896333890

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.