Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31677383›Full record

ArticleClinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America2020

Grindr Users Take More Risks, but Are More Open to Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV) Pre-exposure Prophylaxis: Could This Dating App Provide a Platform for HIV Prevention Outreach?

Martin Hoenigl, Susan J Little, David Grelotti, Britt Skaathun, Gabriel A Wagner, Nadir Weibel, Jamila K Stockman, Davey M Smith

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 32 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
32citing papers in PubMed
4.0field-weighted citation impact, top 5% 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

32 citing papers in PubMed, 60 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Utilizing Machine Learning for Predicting PrEP Use Status Among Sexual and Gender Minority Young Adults.Prevention science : the official journal of the Society for Prevention Research · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. 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

8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Martin HoeniglDivision of Infectious Diseases and Global Public Health, University of California, San Diego, La Jolla, California, USA.
Susan J LittleDivision of Infectious Diseases and Global Public Health, University of California, San Diego, La Jolla, California, USA.
David GrelottiDepartment of Psychiatry, University of California San Diego, La Jolla, California, USA.
Britt SkaathunDivision of Infectious Diseases and Global Public Health, University of California, San Diego, La Jolla, California, USA.
Gabriel A WagnerDivision of Infectious Diseases and Global Public Health, University of California, San Diego, La Jolla, California, USA.
Nadir WeibelDepartment of Computer Science and Engineering, University of California, San Diego, La Jolla, California, USA.
Jamila K StockmanDivision of Infectious Diseases and Global Public Health, University of California, San Diego, La Jolla, California, USA.
Davey M SmithDivision of Infectious Diseases and Global Public Health, University of California, San Diego, La Jolla, California, USA.
University of California, San Diego · US

Funding

UC San Diego Clinical and Translational Research InstituteUL1TR001442 · NCATS · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN DIEGO · PI FIRESTEIN, GARY S, HOGARTH, MICHAEL · 2015 to 2024
$88.3M
VirologyP30AI036214 · NIAID · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN DIEGO · PI David Mitchell Smith · 1994 to 2026
$78.4M
Primary Infection Resource Consortium (PIRC)R24AI106039 · NIAID · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN DIEGO · PI LITTLE, SUSAN JANET · 2013 to 2021
$23.1M
HOPE Training GrantT32AI007384 · NIAID · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN DIEGO · PI Sara Gianella Weibel, Scott L Letendre · 1990 to 2026
$9.7M
Revealing Reservoirs during Rebound (R3)P01AI131385 · NIAID · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN DIEGO · PI SPINA, CELSA A · 2017 to 2021
$8.7M
HIV-1 Dual Infection and Neurocognitive Impairment.K23MH105231 · NIMH · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN DIEGO · PI WAGNER, GABRIEL ARTURO · 2016 to 2019
$813k
NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR001442NIAID NIH HHS P01 AI131385NIAID NIH HHS P30 AI036214NIAID NIH HHS R24 AI106039NIMH NIH HHS K23 MH105231
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTechnology has changed the way that men who have sex with men (MSM) seek sex. More than 60% of MSM in the United States use the internet and/or smartphone-based geospatial networking apps to find sex partners. We correlated use of the most popular app (Grindr) with sexual risk and prevention behavior among MSM.

methodsA nested cohort study was conducted between September 2018 and June 2019 among MSM receiving community-based human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) and sexually transmitted infection (STI) screening in central San Diego. During the testing encounter, participants were surveyed for demographics, substance use, risk behavior (previous 3 months), HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) use, and Grindr usage. Participants who tested negative for HIV and who were not on PrEP were offered immediate PrEP.

resultsThe study included 1256 MSM, 1090 of whom (86.8%) were not taking PrEP. Overall, 580 of 1256 (46%) participants indicated that they used Grindr in the previous 7 days. Grindr users reported significantly higher risk behavior (greater number of male partners and condomless sex) and were more likely to test positive for chlamydia or gonorrhea (8.6% vs 4.7% of nonusers; P = .005). Grindr users were also more likely to be on PrEP (18.7% vs 8.7% of nonusers; P < .001) and had fewer newly diagnosed HIV infections (9 vs 26 among nonusers; P = .014). Grindr users were also nearly twice as likely as nonusers to initiate PrEP (24.6% vs 14%; P < .001).

conclusionsGiven the higher risk behavior and greater acceptance of PrEP among MSM who used Grindr, Grindr may provide a useful platform to promote HIV and STI testing and increase PrEP uptake.

Indexed as

HIV InfectionsMobile ApplicationsPre-Exposure ProphylaxisSexual and Gender MinoritiesCohort StudiesHIVHomosexuality, MaleHumansMaleUnited Statesdating appHIV riskpre-exposure prophylaxisrisk behaviorsubstance use

Identifiers

PMID31677383
PMCPMC7583417
OpenAlexW2987023309

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.