Trial reportJournal of acquired immune deficiency syndromes (1999)2019
Perceived Versus Calculated HIV Risk: Implications for Pre-exposure Prophylaxis Uptake in a Randomized Trial of Men Who Have Sex With Men.
Trial report in Journal of acquired immune deficiency syndromes (1999), 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 57 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
57 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Men who have sex with men perceiving that sex with women carries the greatest risk of HIV acquisition: results from a mixed-methods systematic review in sub-Saharan Africa.Journal of the International AIDS Society · 2024Pooled it
- Perceived risk for HIV acquisition and sexual HIV exposure among sexual and gender minorities: a systematic review.BMC infectious diseases · 2024Pooled it
- Evidence and implication of interventions across various socioecological levels to address pre-exposure prophylaxis uptake and adherence among men who have sex with men in the United States: a systematic review.AIDS research and therapy · 2022Pooled it
- Risk-Based Screening Tools to Optimise HIV Testing Services: a Systematic Review.Current HIV/AIDS reports · 2022Pooled it
- A Multicomponent Intervention (POSSIBLE) to Improve Perceived Risk for HIV Among Black Sexual Minority Men: Feasibility and Preliminary Effectiveness Pilot Study.JMIR human factors · 2024Trial
- Using HIV Risk Self-Assessment Tools to Increase HIV Testing in Men Who Have Sex With Men in Beijing, China: App-Based Randomized Controlled Trial.Journal of medical Internet research · 2023Trial
- HIV Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis Care Continuum in Outpatient Settings: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.AJPM focus · 2026Review
- Strategies to Support HIV Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis Implementation: A National Programmatic Experience in Sexually Transmitted Infection Clinics.Sexually transmitted diseases · 2026Article
- Implementation determinants and outcomes in the Philadelphia TelePrEP Program: a mixed methods study of client and staff perspectives.Implementation science communications · 2026Article
- Pharmacokinetics, Pharmacodynamics, Efficacy and Drug Resistance Selection of Injectable Long-Acting Lenacapavir Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis (PrEP) Against HIV.CPT: pharmacometrics & systems pharmacology · 2026Article
- Factors Associated with Not Seeking Post-exposure Prophylaxis for HIV Among PrEP-Naive Men Who Have Sex with Men: An Analysis from the French ANRS-PREVENIR Study.AIDS and behavior · 2026Article
- HIV Risk Profiles and Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis and Postexposure Prophylaxis Uptake Among Men Who Have Sex With Men in China: Cross-Sectional Latent Class Analysis.JMIR public health and surveillance · 2026Article
- Formative Evaluation of an HIV Prevention App tailored for Latino Men Who Have Sex With Men: Acceptability and Usability Study.JMIR formative research · 2025Article
- Pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, efficacy and drug resistance selection of injectable long-acting lenacapavir pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) against HIV.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2025Article
- Low HIV Testing and PrEP Uptake of Adolescent and Young Men who have Sex with Men in Vietnam.AIDS and behavior · 2025Article
- Awareness of cervical cancer risk factors and preventive approaches, and perceived causes of cervical cancer among secondary school girls: a cross-sectional study in Northern Uganda.Annals of medicine · 2024Article
- Perceived versus actual HIV risk among PrEP indicated persons with criminal legal involvement.AIDS care · 2024Article
- Examining concordance of sexual-related factors and PrEP eligibility with HIV risk perception among adolescent girls and young women: cross-sectional insights from DREAMS sites in Kenya, Malawi, and Zambia.BMC public health · 2024Article
- A Longitudinal Examination of HIV Risk Perception Accuracy among Sexual Minority Men with History of Childhood Sexual Abuse.AIDS and behavior · 2024Article
- HIV Treatment Optimism Moderates the Relationship between Sexual Risk Behavior and HIV Risk Perception among Urban HIV-negative Gay, Bisexual, and Other Men who have Sex With Men.AIDS and behavior · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundInaccurate HIV risk perception by men who have sex with men is a barrier to HIV prevention. Providing information about objective HIV risk could improve pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) uptake.
methodsPrEP Accessibility Research & Evaluation 2 (PrEPARE2) was a randomized controlled trial of men who have sex with men to determine whether an objective risk score affects future PrEP uptake. Participants completed a baseline survey to assess demographics, risk behaviors, and HIV self-perceived risk (SPR). The survey generated a calculated HIV risk (CalcR) score, estimating HIV risk based on reported condomless anal intercourse and sexually transmitted infections, and was provided to individuals in the intervention arm. Participants were contacted 8 weeks later to determine whether they initiated PrEP.
resultsOf 171 participants (median age 32 years; 37% Hispanic or non-Hispanic Black; median 5 sexual partners in the past 6 months), 81% had heard of PrEP, and 57% believed they were good PrEP candidates. SPR had poor agreement with CalcR (kappa = 0.176) with 38% underestimating their HIV risk. At week 8, only 14 of 135 participants had initiated PrEP with no difference between arms (CalcR 11%, control 10%, P > 0.99). The most common reason for not starting PrEP was low HIV risk perception. There was a relative decrease in SPR over time (P = 0.06) but no difference between arms (P = 0.29).
conclusionProviding an objective HIV risk score alone did not increase PrEP uptake. HIV testing performed at testing sites may be a crucial time to correct misperceptions about risk and initiate same-day PrEP, given enthusiasm for PrEP on the testing day to facilitate greater uptake.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.