ReviewThe lancet. HIV2019
Mosaic effectiveness: measuring the impact of novel PrEP methods.
Review in The lancet. HIV, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06803316 (Optimizing Care Delivery to Support Reengagement in PLWH Returning to HIV Care After Treatment Lapses in Zambia), which is not on this map. Cited by 13 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.
Optimizing Care Delivery to Support Reengagement in PLWH Returning to HIV Care After Treatment Lapses in Zambia
Who cites it
13 citing papers in PubMed.
- Incorporating oral PrEP into standard prevention services for South African women: a nested interrupted time-series study.The lancet. HIV · 2021Trial
- Current Contraceptive Practices and Pre-exposure Prophylaxis Modality Preferences among Black and Non-Black Women in the United States: Implications for Bundled Messaging.Archives of sexual behavior · 2026Article
- Predicted choice and acceptability of regimens for tuberculosis preventive treatment among people living with HIV in Uganda - A discrete choice experiment.PLOS global public health · 2026Article
- A Mobile Game Intervention for Young Persons Living With HIV and Depression in Nigeria: Protocol for a Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial.JMIR research protocols · 2025Article
- Instrumental variables for implementation science: exploring context-dependent causal pathways between implementation strategies and evidence-based interventions.Implementation science communications · 2023Article
- Estimating HIV Incident Diagnoses Among Men Who Have Sex With Men Eligible for Pre-exposure Prophylaxis but Not Taking It: Protocol and Feasibility Assessment of Data Sources and Methods.JMIR research protocols · 2023Article
- Patient Preferences for Strategies to Improve Tuberculosis Diagnostic Services in Zambia.JAMA network open · 2022Article
- Revisiting concepts of evidence in implementation science.Implementation science : IS · 2022Article
- "PrEP's just to secure you like insurance": a qualitative study on HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) adherence and retention among black cisgender women in Mississippi.BMC infectious diseases · 2021Article
- Future directions for HIV service delivery research: Research gaps identified through WHO guideline development.PLoS medicine · 2021Article
- A Bayesian averted infection framework for PrEP trials with low numbers of HIV infections: application to the results of the DISCOVER trial.The lancet. HIV · 2020Review
- The where, when, and how of community-based versus clinic-based ART delivery in South Africa and Uganda.The Lancet. Global health · 2020Article
- Statistical approaches to accelerate the development of long-acting antiretrovirals for HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis.Current opinion in HIV and AIDS · 2020Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Various ongoing trials seek to evaluate long-acting pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) agents by showing that they are non-inferior to daily oral tenofovir disoproxil fumarate and emtricitabine. Trials comparing oral PrEP to new methods examine effectiveness in a setting where only one or the other is provided; however, a new product will probably be delivered in a context where oral PrEP is also available. The effectiveness of a new PrEP product is best measured by its potential effect in a context that also includes oral tenofovir disoproxil fumarate and emtricitabine as an option. We offer an alternative standard for long-acting products-a measure of the effectiveness of the new product in addition to oral tenofovir disoproxil fumarate and emtricitabine as compared with oral PrEP alone. We term this measure mosaic effectiveness. We illustrate scenarios where a novel product can fail to show non-inferiority but show substantial mosaic effectiveness, thus implying the public health value of the novel product even if it is less effective than oral PrEP. Regulatory standards should consider mosaic effectiveness, not just comparative effectiveness. We assert that measurements that combine rigor with public health relevance can accelerate progress against the HIV epidemic.
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.