ArticleAIDS and behavior2022
Infrequent STI Testing in New York City Among High Risk Sexual and Gender Minority Individuals Interested In Self- and Partner-Testing.
Article in AIDS and behavior, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Adherence to CDC Guidelines for mpox Evaluation: Practice Patterns Across an Academic Medical System During the 2022 Epidemic.Open forum infectious diseases · 2024Article
- Characterizing Indicators of Engagement in HIV-Associated Healthcare and Clinical Outcomes among People with HIV and Mpox in Washington, DC: A Nested Case-Control Study of the DC Cohort.Pathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
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.
Funding
Abstract
Testing for sexually transmitted infections (STIs) remains low among sexual and gender minority populations. We assessed STI testing history using a retrospective survey among 129 HIV-negative cisgender men who have sex with men (cMSM) and transgender women who have sex with men (tWSM) who were at high risk for STI acquisition. All participants were enrolled in a parent study on self- and partner-testing for HIV and syphilis, and reported condomless anal intercourse with multiple partners during the prior 3 months. We additionally used bivariate tests to evaluate participants' STI testing by their history of using pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP). One-in-seven respondents (n = 18) reported having never tested for an STI, one-quarter (n = 33) had not tested in the past year, and two-thirds (n = 83) had never used PrEP. PrEP-naïve respondents were less likely to report recent STI testing (47% vs. 85%). "Routine doctor's visit" was the most prevalent reason for testing, but was less common among PrEP-naïve respondents (83% vs. 100%). Testing was remarkably low given the sample's high risk of HIV and STI infection. Findings suggest that STI testing is more frequent among those who have ever used PrEP, but the risk of selection bias warrants evaluation in a larger probability sample.
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.