Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35905052›Full record

ArticlePloS one2022

Assessing acceptability of pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) among participants in an HIV vaccine preparedness study in southwestern Uganda.

Sarah Nakamanya, Rachel Kawuma, Denis Kibuuka, Sylvia Kusemererwa, Sheena McCormack, Eugene Ruzagira, Janet Seeley, PrEPVacc Study Group

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.8field-weighted citation impact, top 28% of its field
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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 8 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
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

8 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Sarah NakamanyaMedical Research Council/Uganda Virus Research Institute (MRC/UVRI) and London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine (LSHTM) Uganda Research Unit, Entebbe, Uganda.
Rachel KawumaMedical Research Council/Uganda Virus Research Institute (MRC/UVRI) and London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine (LSHTM) Uganda Research Unit, Entebbe, Uganda.
Denis KibuukaMedical Research Council/Uganda Virus Research Institute (MRC/UVRI) and London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine (LSHTM) Uganda Research Unit, Entebbe, Uganda.ORCID 0000-0001-9400-4018
Sylvia KusemererwaMedical Research Council/Uganda Virus Research Institute (MRC/UVRI) and London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine (LSHTM) Uganda Research Unit, Entebbe, Uganda.ORCID 0000-0002-1390-109X
Sheena McCormackMRC Clinical Trials Unit at UCL, London, United Kingdom.
Eugene RuzagiraMedical Research Council/Uganda Virus Research Institute (MRC/UVRI) and London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine (LSHTM) Uganda Research Unit, Entebbe, Uganda.
Janet SeeleyMedical Research Council/Uganda Virus Research Institute (MRC/UVRI) and London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine (LSHTM) Uganda Research Unit, Entebbe, Uganda.ORCID 0000-0002-0583-5272
PrEPVacc Study Group
Uganda Virus Research Institute · UGLondon School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine · GBMRC Clinical Trials Unit at UCL · GB

Funding

Medical Research Council MC_PC_20056Medical Research Council MC_UU_00004/03Medical Research Council MC_UU_00027/4PEPFAR
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDaily oral pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) use is highly effective against HIV infection. However, the uptake of PrEP among individuals at high-risk of HIV acquisition in sub-Saharan Africa varies because of availability and acceptability. We assessed the acceptability of PrEP among participants in a prospective HIV vaccine preparedness study in Masaka, southwestern Uganda.

methodsFrom November 2018 to August 2019, 20 participants (10 female) were purposively selected for in-depth interviews (IDIs) at 3 and 9 months' post-enrolment in the vaccine preparedness study. Four focus group discussions (FGD) (two among men) were conducted with 29 individuals categorized as: younger (18-24 years) men, younger (18-24 years) women, older (≥30 years) men, and older (≥30 years) women. Apart from IDI specific questions on recent life history including work experience, relationship history and places lived, topics for IDIs and FGDs included knowledge of HIV, perceptions of HIV risk (including own risk), knowledge of and use of PrEP. The Theoretical Framework of Acceptability was used to structure a thematic framework approach for data analysis.

resultsParticipants understood that PrEP was an oral pill taken daily by HIV negative individuals to prevent acquisition of HIV. Overall, interest in and acceptability of PrEP was high, more than half expressed positivity towards PrEP but were not ready to initiate taking it citing the burden of daily oral pill taking, related side effects, stigma and distrust of PrEP. Fourteen participants (from IDI and FGD) initiated PrEP, although some (one FGD and two IDI participants) stopped taking it due to side effects or perceived reduced risk.

conclusionWe observed a keen interest in PrEP initiation among our study participants. However, a limited understanding of PrEP and associated concerns impeded uptake and sustained use. Hence, interventions are needed to address end-user challenges to increase uptake and support adherence.

Indexed as

AIDS VaccinesAnti-HIV AgentsHIV InfectionsPre-Exposure ProphylaxisFemaleHumansMaleProspective StudiesUgandaAIDS VaccinesAnti-HIV Agents

Identifiers

PMID35905052
PMCPMC9337655
OpenAlexW4288716092

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.