ArticleJMIR research protocols2019
Double-Blind, Single-Center, Randomized Three-Way Crossover Trial of Fitted, Thin, and Standard Condoms for Vaginal and Anal Sex: C-PLEASURE Study Protocol and Baseline Data.
Article in JMIR research protocols, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT02753842 (A Double-Blind, Single Center, Randomized 3-way Crossover Trial to Determine Pleasure for Fitted, Thin and Standard Condoms, and to Assess Clinical Failure for Vaginal and Anal Sex), which is not on this map. Cited by 4 papers.
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.
A Double-Blind, Single Center, Randomized 3-way Crossover Trial to Determine Pleasure for Fitted, Thin and Standard Condoms, and to Assess Clinical Failure for Vaginal and Anal Sex
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Integrating a Combination HIV Prevention Intervention Into a Widely Used Geosocial App for Chinese Men Who Have Sex With Men: Protocol for a Single-Arm Pilot and Repeated Cross-Sectional Study.JMIR research protocols · 2025Article
- "I'd Rather Use a Refuse Bag:" A Qualitative Exploration of a South African Community's Perceptions of Government-Provided Condoms and Participant-Preferred Solutions.Archives of sexual behavior · 2021Article
- Protocol for a national probability survey using home specimen collection methods to assess prevalence and incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection and antibody response.Annals of epidemiology · 2020Article
- Levels of clinical condom failure for anal sex: A randomized cross-over trial.EClinicalMedicine · 2019Article
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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundMale condoms are underused despite their ability to prevent transmission of HIV and other sexually transmitted infections. The perception of decreased sexual pleasure and poor condom fit are major contributors to condom nonuse.
objectiveThe purpose of this study was to compare event-level performance and pleasure using fitted, thin, and standard condoms among men who have sex with men (MSM) and men who have sex with women (MSW). We also sought to assess condom type preference. We present the study design and enrollment data from the trial.
methodsThis study recruited sexually active men aged 18 to 54 years in Atlanta, Georgia, United States. We enrolled 252 MSM and 252 MSW in a double-blind, 3-way randomized crossover trial with conditions of fitted, thin, and standard condoms. A permuted block randomization scheme was used to assign each participant to the sequence in which they received each type of study condom. After a baseline screening and enrollment visit, randomized participants were followed for at least 6 and up to 12 weeks depending on their use of study condoms in each 2-week period between scheduled, in-person study visits. Participants were instructed to complete mobile-optimized coital logs as soon as possible after using condoms for anal or vaginal sex acts. The logs collected event-level pleasure and performance measures for the study condoms as well as other relevant data. A questionnaire was administered at the final study visit to assess overall study condom preference.
resultsThe study enrolled 252 MSM and 252 MSW, a total of 504 participants. MSM and MSW study arms were similar for a number of key traits including race and ethnicity, marital status, self-rated condom experience, and recent experience of condom failure. Men in the MSM arm were older, however, and fewer MSM were students. The majority of participants in both arms rated themselves as very experienced with using condoms, and the majority had used condoms recently. Over one-third of participants in each arm reported experiencing condom failure in the last 6 months.
conclusionsThis is the first condom trial to compare the performance of standard, thin, and fitted condoms and to use pleasure and preference as primary outcomes. Given the disparate impact of HIV on MSM, equal enrollment of MSM and MSW was a key feature of this study. Trial results may inform an FDA label indication for anal sex and provide new information regarding the relative performance of different types of condoms.
trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT02753842; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02753842 (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/76RLTFyf0). INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/12205.
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.