Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32405065›Full record

ReviewNature medicine2020

PrEP rollout in Africa: status and opportunity.

Elizabeth M Irungu, Jared M Baeten

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Nature medicine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 88 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
88citing papers in PubMed, 4 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

88 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

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

28 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

2 authors.

Elizabeth M IrunguCollege of Health Sciences, Jomo Kenyatta University of Agriculture and Technology, Nairobi, Kenya.
Jared M BaetenDepartment of Global Health, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA. jbaeten@uw.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8242-8438

Funding

University of Washington/Fred Hutch Center for AIDS ResearchP30AI027757 · NIAID · UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON · PI CONNIE L CELUM · 1988 to 2026
$104.9M
Optimizing Antiretroviral-Based HIV Prevention for HIV Serodiscordant CouplesR01MH095507 · NIMH · UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON · PI BAETEN, JARED · 2011 to 2020
$6.1M
NIAID NIH HHS P30 AI027757NIMH NIH HHS R01 MH095507
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Following recommendations by the World Health Organization in 2015, and key clinical trials, countries in sub-Saharan Africa, the region with the highest burden of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), developed policies that incorporate pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) into national HIV-prevention strategies. By the end of 2019, more than one third of people receiving PrEP globally were in Africa. Crucial understandings gained from early rollout among at-risk populations, such as HIV-serodiscordant couples, adolescent girls and young women, female sex workers, and men who have sex with men, include the importance of strategies for maintaining persistent adherence to PrEP and novel approaches to making PrEP services accessible, simplified and efficient. This Perspective will discuss the current status of these programs and how to further widen their implementation.

Indexed as

AdolescentAdultAfricaAnti-HIV AgentsDrug MonitoringFemaleHIV InfectionsHomosexuality, MaleHumansInfection ControlMalePre-Exposure ProphylaxisSexual and Gender MinoritiesSex WorkersAnti-HIV Agents

Identifiers

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.