ReviewThe Journal of law, medicine & ethics : a journal of the American Society of Law, Medicine & Ethics2022
Review in The Journal of law, medicine & ethics : a journal of the American Society of Law, Medicine & Ethics, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Empowering women at risk: exploring the impact of accountability partners and whatsapp groups on PrEP utilization in Soweto, South Africa.BMC public health · 2025Article
- Leveraging Clinical Decision Support in Dental Settings to Bridge HIV Testing Gaps and Contribute to Ending the Epidemic.ACI open · 2025Article
- Perceived Versus Actual Costs of HIV Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis Among Gay, Bisexual, and Other Men Who Have Sex with Men in the United States.AIDS patient care and STDs · 2024Article
- INTRODUCTIONThe Journal of law, medicine & ethics : a journal of the American Society of Law, Medicine & Ethics · 2022Article
- Addressing Pre-exposure Prophylaxis Awareness and Knowledge Gaps Among Lebanese Medical Professionals: A Cross-Sectional Study.Journal of medical education and curricular developmentArticle
- Equity and Access in HIV Prevention: Addressing Global Disparities in PrEP Use Among Men Who Have Sex With Men Population.American journal of men's healthArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The paper identifies common barriers and challenges to Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis (PrEP) uptake and offers considerations for state and local public health departments to address barriers and retool infrastructure to increase access to PrEP to new users. Authors identify synergistic opportunities with federal agencies and funders to advance PrEP-related HIV prevention efforts, that prioritize strategies and investments to provide PrEP to people who could benefit from the intervention but are unaware of PrEP or struggle to access it. Barriers discussed and examined include financing strategies to reduce financial burden of PrEP medication, expanding PrEP access and outreach beyond clinical settings, and increasing the network and reach of the provider community to serve people we oppress through policy choices and discourses of racial and socioeconomic inferiority.
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.