ArticleAIDS patient care and STDs2022
Back2PrEP: Rates of Bacterial Sexually Transmitted Infection Diagnosis Among Individuals Returning to HIV Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis Care: A Retrospective Review of a New York City Comprehensive HIV Prevention Program.
Article in AIDS patient care and STDs, 2022. 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, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Doxycycline as Postsexual Exposure Prophylaxis: Use, Acceptability, and Associated Sexual Health Behaviors Among a Multi-Site Sample of Clinical Trial Participants.AIDS patient care and STDs · 2024Trial
- PrEParing for Long-acting Technologies: A Multistate Analysis of PrEP Persistence and HIV and STI Lab Coverage Among Oral PrEP Initiators in St. Louis, Missouri (2014-2021).Open forum infectious diseases · 2026Article
- Evaluating Dual Process Decision-Making Along the PrEP Consumer Journey: New Insights for Supporting PrEP Use.AIDS and behavior · 2024Article
- Demographics, Trends, and Clinical Characteristics of HIV Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis Recipients and People Newly Diagnosed with HIV from Large Electronic Health Records in Florida.AIDS patient care and STDs · 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
13 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) effectively reduces new HIV diagnoses. High rates of incident bacterial sexually transmitted infections (STIs) have been observed in patients eligible for and adherent to PrEP. Observational studies generally report low long-term retention in PrEP care. Limited data exist on the rates of bacterial STI diagnosis upon re-engagement with PrEP services. We conducted a retrospective chart review within the HIV prevention program of an urban academic medical center in New York City. Eligible patients started PrEP from 2015 to 2019, then resumed PrEP services after a gap in care of at least 180 days. Demographic, clinical, and laboratory data were used to characterize the patient population and rates of bacterial STI diagnosis at re-engagement. In total, 286 patients were identified, with 316 qualifying re-engagement visits. Twenty-nine percent of patients had continued PrEP during the care gap, and 30% reported discontinuing medication due to a perceived change in risk. A new STI was diagnosed at 19% of re-engagement visits. There was no statistically significant difference in rates of new STI between individuals returning on or off PrEP, nor between those with perceived lower risk and those without. Individuals who fall out of PrEP services and subsequently re-engage remain at high risk of bacterial STI during the gap in care, regardless of whether PrEP medication is continued or the patient perceives themselves to be at lower HIV acquisition risk. Providers should strongly encourage patients discontinuing PrEP to remain engaged in sexual health services. Alternatives to clinic-based PrEP care must still include regular bacterial STI screening.
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.