Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37459174›Full record

ArticleJMIR public health and surveillance2023

Evaluation of Mpox Knowledge, Stigma, and Willingness to Vaccinate for Mpox: Cross-Sectional Web-Based Survey Among Sexual and Gender Minorities.

Thiago Silva Torres, Mayara Secco Torres Silva, Carolina Coutinho, Brenda Hoagland, Emilia Moreira Jalil, Sandra Wagner Cardoso, Julio Moreira, Monica Avelar Magalhaes, Paula Mendes Luz, Valdilea G Veloso and 1 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR public health and surveillance, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 38 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
38citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
6.8field-weighted citation impact, top 2% 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

38 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 48 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

11 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Thiago Silva Torres *Instituto Nacional de Infectologia Evandro Chagas, Fundação Oswaldo Cruz, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.ORCID 0000-0002-2557-601X
Mayara Secco Torres Silva *Instituto Nacional de Infectologia Evandro Chagas, Fundação Oswaldo Cruz, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.ORCID 0000-0002-0195-0337
Carolina CoutinhoInstituto Nacional de Infectologia Evandro Chagas, Fundação Oswaldo Cruz, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.ORCID 0000-0002-9005-8171
Brenda HoaglandInstituto Nacional de Infectologia Evandro Chagas, Fundação Oswaldo Cruz, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.ORCID 0000-0001-8210-3748
Emilia Moreira JalilInstituto Nacional de Infectologia Evandro Chagas, Fundação Oswaldo Cruz, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.ORCID 0000-0001-6017-5660
Sandra Wagner CardosoInstituto Nacional de Infectologia Evandro Chagas, Fundação Oswaldo Cruz, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.ORCID 0000-0001-5230-0003
Julio MoreiraGrupo Arco-Íris, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.ORCID 0000-0002-0799-3776
Monica Avelar MagalhaesInstituto de Comunicação e Informação Científica e Tecnológica em Saúde, Fundação Oswaldo Cruz (ICICT-Fiocruz), Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.ORCID 0000-0002-6595-8274
Paula Mendes LuzInstituto Nacional de Infectologia Evandro Chagas, Fundação Oswaldo Cruz, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.ORCID 0000-0001-9746-719X
Valdilea G VelosoInstituto Nacional de Infectologia Evandro Chagas, Fundação Oswaldo Cruz, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.ORCID 0000-0002-6622-3165
Beatriz GrinsztejnInstituto Nacional de Infectologia Evandro Chagas, Fundação Oswaldo Cruz, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.ORCID 0000-0003-3692-5155
Instituto Evandro Chagas · BRFundação Oswaldo Cruz · BR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe 2022 multicountry mpox outbreak positioned the condition as a public health emergency of international concern. By May 2023, Brazil ranked second globally in the cumulative number of mpox cases and deaths. The higher incidence of mpox among gay and other men who have sex with men in the current mpox outbreak deepens the stigma and discrimination against sexual and gender minorities (SGM). This might worsen the structural barriers impacting access to health services, which ultimately leads to undertesting and underreporting of cases. There are no data available on mpox knowledge and stigma in Latin America.

objectiveWe aimed to evaluate mpox knowledge, stigma, and willingness to vaccinate for mpox among SGM, and to describe sociodemographic and behavioral characteristics according to self-reported mpox diagnosis.

methodsA cross-sectional, internet-based survey was conducted in a convenience sample of adults (aged >18 years) living in Brazil recruited through advertisements on dating apps, social media, referral institutions for infectious diseases websites, and mass media (October-November 2022). We compared participants' characteristics according to self-reported mpox diagnosis using chi-square test or Fisher exact test for qualitative variables and Kruskal-Wallis test for quantitative variables.

resultsWe enrolled 6236 participants: 5685 (91.2%) were cisgender men; 6032 (96.7%) were gay, bisexual, or pansexual; 3877 (62.2%) were White; 4902 (78.7%) had tertiary education; and 4070 (65.2%) reported low or middle income. Most participants (n=5258, 84.4%) agreed or strongly agreed that "LGBTQIA+ individuals are being discriminated and stigmatized due to mpox." Mpox awareness was 96.9% (n=6044), and 5008 (95.1%) were willing to get vaccinated for mpox. Overall, 324 (5.2%) reported an mpox diagnosis. Among these, 318 (98.1%) reported lesions, 178 (56%) local pain, and 316 (99.4%) sought health care. Among participants not reporting a diagnosis, 288 (4.9%) had a suspicious lesion, but only 158 (54.9%) of these had sought health care. Compared to participants with no diagnosis, those reporting an mpox diagnosis were younger (P<.001), reported more sex partners (P<.001), and changes in sexual behavior after mpox onset (P=.002). Moreover, participants diagnosed with mpox reported more frequently being tested for HIV in the prior 3 months (P<.001), living with HIV (P<.001), currently using HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis (P<.001), and previous sexually transmitted infection diagnosis (P<.001).

conclusionsOur results point to high mpox knowledge and willingness to vaccinate among SGM in Brazil. Participants self-reporting mpox diagnosis more frequently reported to be living with HIV, STI diagnosis, and current pre-exposure prophylaxis use, highlighting the importance of an mpox assessment that includes comprehensive sexual health screenings. Efforts to decrease stigma related to mpox among SGM are necessary to avoid mpox underdiagnosis.

Indexed as

HIV InfectionsMpox, MonkeypoxSexually Transmitted DiseasesSocial MediaAdultCross-Sectional StudiesHealth Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticeHomosexuality, MaleHumansMaleSexual and Gender MinoritiesSexual BehaviorVaccinationaccess to careapplicationawarenessbehavioralBrazilcommunitydiagnosisdiscriminationemergencygaygenderhealth knowledgeinfectioninfectious diseaseknowledge translationLatin AmericaLatin America and CaribbeanlesbianLGBTminoritiesminoritymonkeypoxmpoxMSMpatient educationpatient knowledgesexual and gender minoritiessocial mediasociodemographicstigmasurveyviral

Identifiers

PMID37459174
PMCPMC10411424
OpenAlexW4384560274

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.