Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33954824›Full record

ArticleArchives of sexual behavior2021

Exploring Perceived Barriers and Facilitators of PrEP Uptake among Young People in Uganda, Zimbabwe, and South Africa.

Richard Muhumuza, Andrew Sentoogo Ssemata, Ayoub Kakande, Nadia Ahmed, Millicent Atujuna, Mangxilana Nomvuyo, Linda-Gail Bekker, Janan Janine Dietrich, Gugulethu Tshabalala, Stefanie Hornschuh and 7 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Archives of sexual behavior, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 128 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
128citing 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

128 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. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review

68 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

17 authors.

Richard Muhumuza *Medical Research Council/Uganda Virus Research Institute and London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine Uganda Research Unit, P.O. Box 49, Entebbe, Uganda.
Andrew Sentoogo Ssemata *Medical Research Council/Uganda Virus Research Institute and London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine Uganda Research Unit, P.O. Box 49, Entebbe, Uganda.
Ayoub KakandeMedical Research Council/Uganda Virus Research Institute and London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine Uganda Research Unit, P.O. Box 49, Entebbe, Uganda.
Nadia AhmedDesmond Tutu HIV Foundation, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Cape Town, Cape Town, South Africa.
Millicent AtujunaDesmond Tutu HIV Foundation, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Cape Town, Cape Town, South Africa.
Mangxilana NomvuyoDesmond Tutu HIV Foundation, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Cape Town, Cape Town, South Africa.
Linda-Gail BekkerDesmond Tutu HIV Foundation, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Cape Town, Cape Town, South Africa.
Janan Janine DietrichPerinatal HIV Research Unit, School of Clinical Medicine, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa.
Gugulethu TshabalalaPerinatal HIV Research Unit, School of Clinical Medicine, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa.
Stefanie HornschuhPerinatal HIV Research Unit, School of Clinical Medicine, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa.
Mamakiri MaluadziPerinatal HIV Research Unit, School of Clinical Medicine, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa.
Lynda Chibanda-StranixClinical Trials Research Centre, University of Zimbabwe, Harare, Zimbabwe.
Teacler NematadziraClinical Trials Research Centre, University of Zimbabwe, Harare, Zimbabwe.
Helen Anne WeissMRC International Statistics & Epidemiology Group, Department of Infectious Disease Epidemiology, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, UK.
Stephen NashMRC International Statistics & Epidemiology Group, Department of Infectious Disease Epidemiology, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, UK.
Julie Fox *Department of Infectious Diseases, King's College London, London, UK.
Janet Seeley *Medical Research Council/Uganda Virus Research Institute and London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine Uganda Research Unit, P.O. Box 49, Entebbe, Uganda. janet.seeley@lshtm.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0583-5272

Funding

Medical Research Council MC_UU_00027/4Medical Research Council MR/R010161/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) is an effective HIV prevention strategy. Few studies have explored adolescents and young people's perspectives toward PrEP. We conducted 24 group discussions and 60 in-depth interviews with males and females aged 13-24 years in Uganda, Zimbabwe, and South Africa between September 2018 and February 2019. We used the framework approach to generate themes and key concepts for analysis following the social ecological model. Young people expressed a willingness to use PrEP and identified potential barriers and facilitators of PrEP uptake. Barriers included factors at individual (fear of HIV, fear of side effects, and PrEP characteristics), interpersonal (parental influence, absence of a sexual partner), community (peer influence, social stigma), institutional (long waiting times at clinics, attitudes of health workers), and structural (cost of PrEP and mode of administration, accessibility concerns) levels. Facilitators included factors at individual (high HIV risk perception and preventing HIV/desire to remain HIV negative), interpersonal (peer influence, social support and care for PrEP uptake), community (adequate PrEP information and sensitization, evidence of PrEP efficacy and safety), institutional (convenient and responsive services, provision of appropriate and sufficiently resourced services), and structural (access and availability of PrEP, cost of PrEP) levels. The findings indicated that PrEP is an acceptable HIV prevention method. PrEP uptake is linked to personal and environmental factors that need to be considered for successful PrEP roll-out. Multi-level interventions needed to promote PrEP uptake should consider the social and structural drivers and focus on ways that can inspire PrEP uptake and limit the barriers.

Indexed as

Anti-HIV AgentsHIV InfectionsPatient Acceptance of Health CarePre-Exposure ProphylaxisAdolescentAttitude to HealthFemaleHumansMaleSouth AfricaUgandaYoung AdultZimbabweAnti-HIV AgentsAdolescentsBarriersFacilitatorsHIV preventionPrEP

Identifiers

PMID33954824
PMCPMC8213546

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.