Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37827743›Full record

Trial reportBMJ open2023

Did mpox knowledge, attitudes and beliefs affect intended behaviour in the general population and men who are gay, bisexual and who have sex with men? An online cross-sectional survey in the UK.

Louise E Smith, Henry Ww Potts, Julii Brainard, Tom May, Isabel Oliver, Richard Amlôt, Lucy Yardley, G James Rubin

Open access · goldAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in BMJ open, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
5.5field-weighted citation impact, top 3% 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

17 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 20 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Mpox in Africa: What we know and what is still lacking.PLoS neglected tropical diseases · 2025
    Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. 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 5 institutions in 2 countries.

Louise E SmithDepartment of Psychological Medicine, King's College London, London, UK louise.e.smith@kcl.ac.uk.ORCID 0000-0002-1277-2564
Henry Ww PottsInstitute of Health Informatics, University College London, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-6200-8804
Julii BrainardNorwich Medical School, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-5272-7995
Tom MaySchool of Psychological Science, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-3077-523X
Isabel OliverUK Health Security Agency, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-6106-1734
Richard AmlôtUK Health Security Agency, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-3481-6588
Lucy YardleySchool of Psychological Science, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-3853-883X
G James RubinDepartment of Psychological Medicine, King's College London, London, UK.
King's College London · GBUK Health Security Agency · GBUniversity of Bristol · GBUniversity College London · GBUniversity of East Anglia · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo investigate rates of mpox beliefs, knowledge and intended behaviours in the general population and in gay, bisexual or other men who have sex with men (GBMSM), and factors associated with intended behaviours. To test the impact of motivational messages (vs a factual control) on intended behaviours.

designCross-sectional online survey including a nested randomised controlled trial.

settingData collected from 5 September 2022 to 6 October 2022.

participantsParticipants were aged 18 years or over and lived in the UK (general population). In addition, GBMSM were male, and gay, bisexual or had sex with men. The general population sample was recruited through a market research company. GBMSM were recruited through a market research company, the dating app Grindr and targeted adverts on Meta (Facebook and Instagram).

main outcome measuresIntention to self-isolate, seek medical help, stop all sexual contact, share details of recent sexual contacts and accept vaccination.

resultsSociodemographic characteristics differed by sample. There was no effect of very brief motivational messaging on behavioural intentions. Respondents from Grindr and Meta were more likely to intend to seek help immediately, completely stop sexual behaviour and be vaccinated or intend to be vaccinated, but being less likely to intend to self-isolate (ps<0.001). In the general population sample, intending to carry out protective behaviours was generally associated with being female, older, having less financial hardship, greater worry, higher perceived risk to others and higher perceived susceptibility to and severity of mpox (ps<0.001). There were fewer associations with behaviours in the Grindr sample, possibly due to reduced power.

conclusionsGBMSM were more likely to intend to enact protective behaviours, except for self-isolation. This may reflect targeted public health efforts and engagement with this group. Associations with socioeconomic factors suggest that providing financial support may encourage people to engage with protective behaviours.

Indexed as

HIV InfectionsMpox, MonkeypoxSexual and Gender MinoritiesCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleHealth Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticeHomosexuality, MaleHumansMaleSexual BehaviorUnited Kingdompublic healthsexual medicine

Identifiers

PMID37827743
PMCPMC10583036
OpenAlexW4387569622

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.