ArticleJournal of general internal medicine2021
Primary Care and Pre-exposure Prophylaxis Services in Publicly Funded Family Planning Clinics in the Southern United States.
Article in Journal of general internal medicine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Using qualitative comparative analysis to understand the conditions that produce successful PrEP implementation in family planning clinics.Implementation science communications · 2023Article
- Tennessee Pharmacists' Opinions on Barriers and Facilitators to Initiate PrEP: A Qualitative Study.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
- Qualitative analysis of patient and key informant interviews to inform integration of HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis services into gynecology care in Alabama.Women's health (London, England)Article
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 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundHIV pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) is underutilized by US women. Cost and resource concerns are barriers to PrEP delivery in settings that see men. Family planning clinics may be ideal PrEP delivery settings for women, but as they are not uniform in their clinical services, cost and resource concerns may vary.
objectiveWe examined factors that influence perceptions of costs and resources related to PrEP delivery in Title X-funded family planning clinics in Southern states, which overlaps with high HIV-burden areas.
designWe conducted a web-based survey among a convenience sample of clinicians and administrators of Title X clinics across 18 Southern states (DHHS regions III, IV, VI). We compared cost- and resource-related survey items and other clinic- and county-level variables between clinics by whether their clinics also provided other primary care services. We analyzed interviews for cost and resource themes.
participantsTitle X clinic staff in the South. KEY
resultsAmong 283 unique clinics, a greater proportion of clinics that also provided primary care currently provided PrEP compared with those that did not provide primary care (27.8% vs. 18.3%, p = 0.06), but this difference was not statistically significant. Among 414 respondents in clinics that were not providing PrEP, those in clinics with primary care services were more likely to respond that they had the necessary financial resources (p < 0.01) and staffing (p < 0.01) for PrEP implementation compared to those without primary care services. In interviews, respondents differed on concerns about costs of labs and staffing based on whether their clinic had concomitant primary care services or not.
conclusionsAmong publicly funded Southern family planning clinics, current PrEP provision was higher among clinics with concomitant primary care. Among clinics not providing PrEP, those with concomitant primary care services have lower perceived cost and resource barriers and therefore may be optimal for expanding PrEP among women.
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.