ArticlePublic health reports (Washington, D.C. : 1974)
Evaluating the Screening and Enrollment of People at Risk of HIV in Mexico's Preexposure Prophylaxis Demonstration Project, 2018-2020.
Article in Public health reports (Washington, D.C. : 1974). The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesScreening tools in which participants self-report sexual behaviors can identify people at risk of HIV acquisition for enrollment in preexposure prophylaxis (PrEP). We compared enrollment outcomes (ie, receiving PrEP vs being excluded by a counselor or declining PrEP) in Mexico's PrEP demonstration project and evaluated the validity of a 4-criteria PrEP eligibility tool in which participants self-reported risk behavior-having condomless anal sex, transactional sex, a partner living with HIV, or a sexually transmitted infection-as compared with PrEP eligibility assessed by a counselor.
methodsWe recruited men who have sex with men and transwomen who were offered PrEP services in Mexico. We characterized participants according to enrollment outcome and identified underlying factors through logistic regression analyses. We calculated the sensitivity and specificity of the self-reported risk criteria, using the counselor's risk assessment as the point of reference.
resultsOf 2460 participants, 2323 (94%) had risk criteria of HIV acquisition according to the 4-criteria tool; 1701 (73%) received PrEP, 247 (11%) were excluded by a counselor, and 351 (15%) declined PrEP despite being considered eligible by the counselor. Participants who were excluded or who declined PrEP were less likely to report HIV risk behaviors than those who received PrEP, and participants who declined PrEP were more likely to be transwomen (vs men who have sex with men) and aged ≤25 years (vs >25 y). The 4-criteria risk tool had high sensitivity (98.6%) and low specificity (29.8%).
conclusionThe screening tool identified most participants at risk of HIV acquisition, but counselors' assessment helped refine the decision for enrollment in PrEP by excluding those with low risk. Public health strategies are needed to enhance enrollment in PrEP among some groups.
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.