Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36530709›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in public health2022

PrEP stigma among current and non-current PrEP users in Thailand: A comparison between hospital and key population-led health service settings.

Sineenart Chautrakarn, Ajaree Rayanakorn, Kannikar Intawong, Chonlisa Chariyalertsak, Porntip Khemngern, Scott Stonington, Suwat Chariyalertsak

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in public health, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.2field-weighted citation impact, top 19% 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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 13 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
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

7 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Sineenart ChautrakarnFaculty of Public Health, Chiang Mai University, Chiang Mai, Thailand.
Ajaree RayanakornFaculty of Public Health, Chiang Mai University, Chiang Mai, Thailand.
Kannikar IntawongFaculty of Public Health, Chiang Mai University, Chiang Mai, Thailand.
Chonlisa ChariyalertsakFaculty of Public Health, Chiang Mai University, Chiang Mai, Thailand.
Porntip KhemngernDivision of AIDS and STIs, Department of Disease Control, Ministry of Public Health, Nonthaburi, Thailand.
Scott StoningtonDepartments of Internal Medicine and Anthropology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, United States.
Suwat ChariyalertsakFaculty of Public Health, Chiang Mai University, Chiang Mai, Thailand.
Chiang Mai University · THMinistry of Public Health · THUniversity of Michigan–Ann Arbor · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) has demonstrated effectiveness in high-risk populations. PrEP service in Thailand became free of charge under the Universal Health Coverage (UHC) in 2021. The National Health Security Office launched a pilot project in 2020 to ensure sustainable service delivery, and the national monitoring and evaluation (M&E) framework was adopted to evaluate early phase implementation. We carried out a cross-sectional survey as part of the M&E process to investigate PrEP stigma among current and non-current PrEP users from both hospital and Key Population Led Health Services (KPLHS) settings in Thailand. Methods: Between August and October 2020, an online cross-sectional survey was conducted. A link for a self-administered questionnaire was distributed to all active PrEP centers and PrEP clients were then recruited by PrEP providers. Descriptive and univariate analysis using Chi-square were applied in the analyses. Attitudes toward PrEP were ranked from the most negative to the most positive. The negative attitude can be interpreted as PrEP stigma. Results: This study included 513 PrEP clients (355 from hospitals and 158 from KPLHS). In both settings, respondents' attitudes toward PrEP were generally positive, but some potential stigma was observed. 31.8% of hospital PrEP clients and 9.5% of KPLHS clients agreed that PrEP users should keep their pills hidden from others. Almost half (44.5%) of hospital clients and 18.4% of KPLHS clients agreed that PrEP users are often viewed negatively by society. More than 20% of hospital clients and 12% of KPLHS agreed that PrEP users frequently experience difficulties when their partner/lover/family find out that he or she is on PrEP. Respondents from the hospitals had slightly higher PrEP stigma than those from KPLHS. Conclusions: According to our findings, at the policy level, the campaign to provide PrEP education to all groups of people should be continued in order to promote a positive view of PrEP and reduce PrEP-related stigma among the general population, which is critical for successful PrEP implementation.

Indexed as

HIV InfectionsPre-Exposure ProphylaxisCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleHospitalsHumansPilot ProjectsThailandending AIDShigh-risk populationsHIV preventionPrEP stigmauniversal health coverage

Identifiers

PMID36530709
PMCPMC9755171
OpenAlexW4311193938

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.