ArticlePloS one2024
Health care providers' decision-making and early adoption of tenofovir alafenamide for HIV preexposure prophylaxis: An inductive qualitative study.
Article in PloS one, 2024. 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.
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
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundOver the past several years, there have been several changes affecting the available options for oral HIV preexposure prophylaxis, including approvals for tenofovir alafenamide with emtricitabine in 2019 and a generic formulation of tenofovir disoproxil fumarate with emtricitabine in 2020.
methodsIn order to better understand providers' decision-making processes when deciding between these two drugs for pre-exposure prophylaxis, we conducted semi-structured in-depth interviews with resident, fellow and attending physicians in internal medicine and infectious diseases between May 2020 and March 2021. These interviews were analyzed to identify emergent codes, which were utilized in an inductive thematic analysis to identify major themes pertinent to pre-exposure prophylaxis decision-making.
resultsOf 21 participants, 18 expressed a general preference for prescribing tenofovir disoproxil fumarate with emtricitabine, 2 preferred tenofovir alafenamide with emtricitabine and 1 had no specific preference. Providers perceived similar efficacy of the two formulations, and their clinical decisions were influenced primarily by whether HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis users belonged to a population with an indication for each of the two drugs (e.g. gender-related restrictions for tenofovir alafenamide), the medications' differing side effect profiles, cost and insurance considerations, prior personal and collective experience with each of these medications, and personal preferences. Respondents also noted that both providers and HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis users were influenced by external factors, including institutional prescribing guidance, advertising, and social influences, including from peers and colleagues.
conclusionsOur findings suggest that unbiased educational campaigns for both prescribers and users of HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis will be important to support evidence-based prescribing practices and cost-effective decisions among oral pre-exposure prophylaxis options.
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.