ArticleHarm reduction journal2024
Feasibility, acceptability, and perceived usefulness of a community-evidence-based harm reduction intervention for sexualized stimulant use among Mexican gay, bisexual, and other men who have sex with men.
Article in Harm reduction journal, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Mobile Apps for HIV and Sexually Transmitted Infection Prevention in Canada, Mexico, and the United States: Environmental Scan.JMIR mHealth and uHealth · 2025Article
- Prevalence of Sexualized Substance Use and Chemsex in the General Population and Among Women: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Cross-Sectional Studies.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe use of stimulants and other substances with the purpose of enhancing, maintaining, and prolonging sexual activity is known as sexualized substance use. Also known as chemsex, this pattern of use has been mainly explored in high-income countries. The aim of this article was to assess the feasibility, acceptability, and usefulness of a community- evidence-based harm reduction intervention among Mexican gay, bisexual, and other men who have sex with men (gbMSM) adults who reported sexualized stimulant use in the past 6 months and who were not enrolled in any psychosocial treatment.
methodsThe in-person intervention was designed in partnership with gbMSM who used substances. It consisted of 39 harm reduction strategies before, during, and after episodes of use. The components of the intervention were health and self-care, safety, and psychopharmacology. The intervention was delivered at a university campus, a public recreational space, and an HIV public clinic. Feasibility to deliver the intervention was assessed based on enrolment and completion rates; acceptability through a 28-item, 5-point Likert scale (140 max.) constructed and validated for the Mexican population with good reliability coefficients; usefulness through a 5-point Likert scale ("not useful"-"very useful") for each of the 39 strategies; and potential behavioral change by subtracting the likelihood of implementing each strategy minus the frequency of use of the technique before the intervention.
resultsParticipants (n = 19; recruitment rate = 35.2%; completion rate = 84.2%) rated the intervention as acceptable with a mean score of 121.6 (SD = 7.5). The highest potential for behavioral change was regarding the use of information about the half-life of stimulants, polysubstance use, and overdose prevention.
conclusionsThis intervention is feasible when provided within public health services where potential participants are already in contact. Harm reduction strategies need to surpass sexually transmitted infections prevention and HIV care and focus on substance use and mental health strategies.
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.