Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37312073›Full record

ArticleBMC public health2023

Disjuncture between self-perceived and clinically assessed risk of HIV among gay, bisexual, and other men who have sex with men in Ontario and British Columbia, Canada.

Oscar Javier Pico-Espinosa, Mark Hull, Mark Gaspar, Nathan Lachowsky, Daniel Grace, Robinson Truong, Saira Mohammed, Paul MacPherson, Kevin Woodward, Darrell H S Tan

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC public health, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. CMAJ : Canadian Medical Association journal = journal de l'Association medicale canadienne · 2025
    Guideline
  2. Canadian guideline on HIV pre- and postexposure prophylaxis: 2025 update.CMAJ : Canadian Medical Association journal = journal de l'Association medicale canadienne · 2025
    Guideline
  3. Pooled it
  4. Review
  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

10 authors.

Oscar Javier Pico-EspinosaSt Michael's Hospital, Toronto, ON, Canada. oscarjavier.picoespinosa@unityhealth.to.
Mark HullBC Centre for Excellence in HIV/AIDS, Vancouver, BC, Canada.
Mark GasparUniversity of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Nathan LachowskyUniversity of Victoria, Victoria, BC, Canada.
Daniel GraceUniversity of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Robinson TruongSt Michael's Hospital, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Saira MohammedBC Centre for Excellence in HIV/AIDS, Vancouver, BC, Canada.
Paul MacPhersonUniversity of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON, Canada.
Kevin WoodwardMcMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada.
Darrell H S TanSt Michael's Hospital, Toronto, ON, Canada.

Funding

CIHR
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSelf-perceived and clinically assessed HIV risk do not always align. We compared self-perceived and clinically assessed risk of HIV and the reasons for self-perceived low risk of HIV among gay, bisexual, and other men who have sex with men (GBM) from large urban centers in Ontario and British Columbia, Canada.

methodsNever PrEP users recruited from sexual health clinics or online, completed a cross-sectional survey between July/2019 and August/2020. We contrasted self-perceived HIV risk against criteria from the Canadian PrEP guidelines and participants were categorized as concordant or discordant. We used content analysis to categorize participants' free-text explanations for perceived low HIV risk. These were compared with answers to quantitative responses about condomless sex acts and number of partners.

resultsOf 315 GBM who self-perceived low risk of HIV, 146 (46%) were considered at high risk according to the guidelines. Participants with discordant assessment were younger, had less years of formal education, were more often in an open relationship and were more likely to self-identify as gay. Reasons for self-perceived low HIV risk in the discordant group were condom use (27%), being in a committed relationship/having one main partner (15%), having no or infrequent anal sex (12%) and having few partners (10%).

conclusionsThere is a disjuncture between self-perceived and clinically assessed risk of HIV. Some GBM may underestimate their HIV risk and clinical criteria may overestimate risk. Bridging these gaps requires efforts to increase HIV risk awareness in the community, and refinement of clinical assessments based on individualized discussions between the provider and the user.

Indexed as

HIV InfectionsSexual and Gender MinoritiesBritish ColumbiaCross-Sectional StudiesHomosexuality, MaleHumansMaleOntarioAnd other men who have sex with menBisexualGayNeeds and demandPre-exposure prophylaxisPreventive health services

Identifiers

PMID37312073
PMCPMC10262517

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.