Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31328429›Full record

ReviewJournal of the International AIDS Society2019

Understanding user perspectives of and preferences for oral PrEP for HIV prevention in the context of intervention scale-up: a synthesis of evidence from sub-Saharan Africa.

Robyn Eakle, Peter Weatherburn, Adam Bourne

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of the International AIDS Society, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 45 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
45citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

45 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

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

3 authors.

Robyn EakleDepartment of Global Health and Development, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, United Kingdom.
Peter WeatherburnSigma Research, Department of Public Health, Environments and Society, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, United Kingdom.
Adam BourneAustralian Research Centre in Sex, Health & Society, La Trobe University, Melbourne, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionOral pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) for HIV prevention has been proven to significantly reduce new HIV infections yet scale-up has been slow. As contexts continue to adjust to make space for PrEP, it is crucial to understand the perspectives and experiences of potential end-users. In order to inform PrEP and demand creation interventions, this paper examines personal perspectives on adopting and using PrEP among HIV at-risk populations in sub-Saharan Africa.

methodsUsing the principles of a scoping review in July 2018, we explored the extent, range, and nature of published literature regarding PrEP uptake and use among; men who have sex with men, HIV serodiscordant couples, adolescent girls and young women, pregnant and breastfeeding women, women partners of migrant workers; and people who use drugs. Steps included: identification of the research question; identification of relevant studies; study selection; charting the data; and collation - summarizing and reporting results. PubMed and PsycInfo were searched for papers relating to PrEP uptake and use in sub-Saharan Africa. Resulting papers were reviewed with data extracted and compiled in Excel for analysis. A broad content analysis was conducted and organized into high-level themes. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION: Thirty-five papers were included in this review. There was little opposition in general to oral PrEP; however, there were significant nuances in its broader acceptability, applicability, and usability. We identified five themes within which these are discussed. These relate to balancing complexities of personal empowerment and stigma; navigating complex risk environments; influences of relationships and partners; efficacy and side effects; and practicalities of use. This body of research suggests that while product attributes and the logistics of PrEP delivery and use are important topics, it is vital to consider stigma, the interactions of PrEP use with relationships, and the need for broader understanding of ARVs for prevention versus treatment.

conclusionsPlanning for, programming and promoting the adoption of oral PrEP necessitates a deeper understanding of end-user priorities in order to ensure successful interventions. This review illustrates the nuances facilitating or deterring PrEP use that may affect the larger effort of PrEP scale-up.

Indexed as

Pre-Exposure ProphylaxisAnti-HIV AgentsFemaleHIV InfectionsHumansMaleSocial StigmaAnti-HIV Agentsacceptabilityend-userHIV preventionkey and vulnerable populationspre-exposure prophylaxispublic health

Identifiers

PMID31328429
PMCPMC6643067

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.