ArticlePloS one2020
Healthcare practitioner experiences and willingness to prescribe pre-exposure prophylaxis in the US.
Article in PloS one, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Boosting HIV Pre-exposure Prophylaxis (PrEP) Prescribing Confidence in a Southern Family Medicine Residency.Cureus · 2025Article
- "PrEP is always on the table": mixed methods study of provider willingness to refer/link clients to PrEP in community sexual health and drug use-related programs.Journal of HIV/AIDS & social services · 2025Article
- Internal Medicine Resident Perceptions of the Barriers to and Facilitators of Optimal Inpatient Care for HIV Prevention of Persons Who Inject Drugs: A Mixed Methods Study.Open forum infectious diseases · 2025Article
- Association of Partnership-Level Methamphetamine Use on Inconsistent PrEP Care Engagement Among GBMSM in Los Angeles County.AIDS and behavior · 2024Article
- Examination of HIV Preexposure Prophylaxis Need, Availability, and Potential Pharmacy Integration in the Southeastern US.JAMA network open · 2023Article
- Health Literacy as a Mediator of the Relationship Between Socioeconomic Position and Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis Uptake Among Men Who Have Sex with Men Living in France.Health literacy research and practice · 2023Article
- How Do Family Physicians Perceive Their Role in Providing Pre-exposure Prophylaxis for HIV Prevention?-An Online Qualitative Study in Flanders, Belgium.Frontiers in medicine · 2022Article
- Substance Use and Healthcare Utilization Across the Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis (PrEP) Care Cascade among Black and Latino Men Who Have Sex with Men.Substance use & misuse · 2022Article
- PrEP Prescription for Black Adolescent Girls and Young Women in Alabama: Findings from a Survey of Healthcare Providers.Journal of the International Association of Providers of AIDS CareArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
objectivesLess than 10 percent of the more than one million people vulnerable to HIV are using pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP). Practitioners are critical to ensuring the delivery of PrEP across care settings. In this study, we target a group of prescribers focused on providing HIV care and seeking up-to-date information about HIV. We assessed their experiences prescribing PrEP, whether these experiences differed by clinical specialty, and examined associations between willingness to prescribe PrEP as a "best first step" and different hypothetical prescribing scenarios. SETTING AND
methodsBetween March and May 2015, we circulated a paper survey to 954 participants ((652 of whom met our inclusion criteria of being independent prescribers and 519 of those (80%) responded to the survey)) at continuing medical education advanced-level HIV courses in five locations across the US on practitioner practices and preferences of PrEP. We employed multivariable logistic regression analysis for binary and collapsed ordinal outcomes.
resultsAmong this highly motivated group of practitioners, only 54% reported ever prescribing PrEP. Internal medicine practitioners were 1.6 times more likely than infectious disease practitioners to have prescribed PrEP (95% CI: 0.99-2.60, p = .0524) and age, years of training, and sex were significantly associated with prescribing experience. Based on clinical vignettes describing different hypothetical prescribing scenarios, practitioners who viewed PrEP as the first clinical step for persons who inject drugs (PWID) were twice as likely to have also considered PrEP as the first clinical option for safer conception, and vice-a-versa (95% CI: 1.4-3.2, p < .001). Practitioners considering PrEP as the first preventive option for MSM were nearly six times as likely to also consider PrEP as the first clinical step for PWID, and vice-a-versa (95% CI: 2.28-13.56, p = .0002).
conclusionsOur findings indicate that even among a subset of HIV-focused practitioners, PrEP prescribing is not routine. This group of practitioners could be an optimal group to engage individuals that could most benefit from PrEP.
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.