Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38743381›Full record

SynthesisAIDS and behavior2024

Identifying Best Practices for Increasing HIV Pre-exposure Prophylaxis (PrEP) Use and Persistence in the United States: A Systematic Review.

Emiko Kamitani, Darrel H Higa, Nicole Crepaz, Megan Wichser, Mary M Mullins, U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s Prevention Research Synthesis Project

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in AIDS and behavior, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed
–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

13 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Integrating CBPR and Implementation Science to Develop a PrEP-Promotion Intervention for Black Transgender Women.Health education & behavior : the official publication of the Society for Public Health Education · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. 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

6 authors.

Emiko KamitaniDivision of HIV Prevention, U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, GA, 30329-4027, USA. ekamitani@cdc.gov.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0676-8681
Darrel H HigaDivision of HIV Prevention, U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, GA, 30329-4027, USA.
Nicole CrepazDivision of HIV Prevention, U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, GA, 30329-4027, USA.
Megan WichserDivision of HIV Prevention, U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, GA, 30329-4027, USA.
Mary M MullinsDivision of HIV Prevention, U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, GA, 30329-4027, USA.
U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s Prevention Research Synthesis Project

Funding

Intramural CDC HHS CC999999
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

A qualitative systematic review was conducted to evaluate pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) interventions, describe characteristics of best practices for increasing PrEP use and persistence, and explore research gaps based on current PrEP interventions. We searched CDC's Prevention Research Synthesis (PRS) Project's cumulative HIV database (includes CINAHL, EMBASE, Global Health, MEDLINE, PsycInfo, and Sociological Abstracts) to identify PrEP intervention studies conducted in the U.S., published between 2000 and 2022 (last searched January 2023). Eligibility criteria include studies that evaluated PrEP interventions for persons testing negative for HIV infection, or for healthcare providers who prescribed PrEP; included comparisons between groups or pre/post; and reported at least one relevant PrEP outcome. Each eligible intervention was evaluated on the quality of study design, implementation, analysis, and strength of evidence (PROSPERO registration number: CRD42021256460). Of the 26 eligible interventions, the majority were focused on men who have sex with men (n = 18) and reported PrEP adherence outcomes (n = 12). Nine interventions met the criteria for Best Practices (i.e., evidence-based interventions, evidence-informed interventions). Five were digital health interventions while two implemented individual counseling, one offered motivational interviewing, and one provided integrated medical care with a PrEP peer navigator. Longer intervention periods may provide more time for intervention exposure to facilitate behavioral change, and engaging the community when developing, designing and implementing interventions may be key for effectiveness. For digital health interventions, two-way messaging may help participants feel supported. Research gaps included a lack of Best Practices for several populations (e.g., Black persons, Hispanic/Latino persons, persons who inject drugs, and women of color) and evidence for various intervention strategies (e.g., interventions for promoting provider's PrEP prescription behavior, peer support). These findings call for more collaborative work with communities to develop interventions that work and implement and disseminate Best Practices for increasing PrEP use and persistence in communities.

Indexed as

Anti-HIV AgentsHIV InfectionsPre-Exposure ProphylaxisFemaleHumansMaleMedication AdherencePractice Guidelines as TopicUnited StatesAnti-HIV AgentsEvidence-based practiceHIVInterventionsPre-exposure prophylaxisPrEP persistencePrEP userSystematic review

Identifiers

PMID38743381
PMCPMC11199112

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.