Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39636892›Full record

ArticlePLOS global public health2024

Knowledge, uptake and intention to use antibiotic post-exposure prophylaxis and meningococcal B vaccine (4CMenB) for gonorrhoea among a large, online community sample of men and gender-diverse individuals who have sex with men in the UK.

Dana Ogaz, Jessica Edney, Dawn Phillips, Dolores Mullen, David Reid, Ruth Wilkie, Erna Buitendam, James Bell, Catherine M Lowndes, Gwenda Hughes and 4 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PLOS global public health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing 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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 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

14 authors.

Dana OgazBlood Safety, Hepatitis, STI & HIV Division, UK Health Security Agency, London, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1900-8892
Jessica EdneyBlood Safety, Hepatitis, STI & HIV Division, UK Health Security Agency, London, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0003-9920-1848
Dawn PhillipsBlood Safety, Hepatitis, STI & HIV Division, UK Health Security Agency, London, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0001-1508-1697
Dolores MullenBlood Safety, Hepatitis, STI & HIV Division, UK Health Security Agency, London, United Kingdom.
David ReidThe National Institute for Health Research Health Protection Research Unit in Blood Borne and Sexually Transmitted Infections at University College London in Partnership with the UK Health Security Agency, London, United Kingdom.
Ruth WilkieBlood Safety, Hepatitis, STI & HIV Division, UK Health Security Agency, London, United Kingdom.
Erna BuitendamBlood Safety, Hepatitis, STI & HIV Division, UK Health Security Agency, London, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4612-7408
James BellBlood Safety, Hepatitis, STI & HIV Division, UK Health Security Agency, London, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2265-1205
Catherine M LowndesBlood Safety, Hepatitis, STI & HIV Division, UK Health Security Agency, London, United Kingdom.
Gwenda HughesUK Public Health Rapid Support Team, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, United Kingdom.
Helen FiferBlood Safety, Hepatitis, STI & HIV Division, UK Health Security Agency, London, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7756-403X
Catherine H MercerThe National Institute for Health Research Health Protection Research Unit in Blood Borne and Sexually Transmitted Infections at University College London in Partnership with the UK Health Security Agency, London, United Kingdom.
John SaundersBlood Safety, Hepatitis, STI & HIV Division, UK Health Security Agency, London, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3020-9916
Hamish MohammedBlood Safety, Hepatitis, STI & HIV Division, UK Health Security Agency, London, United Kingdom.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Novel STI prevention interventions, including doxycycline post-exposure prophylaxis (doxyPEP) and meningococcal B vaccination (4CMenB) against gonorrhoea, have been increasingly examined as tools to aid STI control. There is evidence of the efficacy of doxyPEP in preventing bacterial STIs; however, limited data exist on the extent of use in the UK. We examined self-reported knowledge and use of antibiotic post-exposure prophylaxis (PEP), and intention to use (ITU) doxyPEP and 4CMenB among a large, community sample of men and gender-diverse individuals who have sex with men in the UK. Using data collected by the RiiSH survey (November/December 2023), part of a series of online surveys of men and other gender-diverse individuals in the UK, we describe (%, [95% CI]) self-reported knowledge and use of antibiotic PEP (including doxyPEP) and doxyPEP and 4CMenB ITU. Using bivariate and multivariable logistic regression, we examined correlates of ever using antibiotic PEP, doxyPEP ITU, and 4CMenB ITU, respectively, adjusting for sociodemographic characteristics and a composite marker of sexual risk defined as reporting (in the last three months): ≥5 condomless anal sex partners, bacterial STI diagnosis, chemsex, and/or meeting partners at sex-on-premises venues, sex parties, or cruising locations. Of 1,106 participants (median age: 44 years [IQR: 34-54]), 34% (30%-37%) knew of antibiotic PEP; 8% (6%-10%) ever reported antibiotic PEP use. Among those who did, most reported use in the last year (84%, 73/87) and exclusively used doxycycline (69%, 60/87). Over half of participants reported doxyPEP ITU (51% [95% CI: 47%-56%], 568/1,106) while over two-thirds (64% [95% CI: 60%-69%], 713/1,106) reported 4CMenB ITU. Participants with markers of sexual risk and with uptake of other preventative interventions were more likely to report ever using antibiotic PEP as well as doxyPEP and 4CMenB ITU, respectively. HIV-PrEP users and people living with HIV (PLWHIV) were more likely to report antibiotic PEP use and doxyPEP and 4CMenB vaccination ITU than HIV-negative participants not reporting recent HIV-PrEP use. Findings demonstrate considerable interest in the use of novel STI prevention interventions, more so for 4CMenB vaccination relative to doxyPEP. Fewer than one in ten participants had reported ever using antibiotic PEP, with most using appropriate, evidence-based antibiotics. The use of antibiotic PEP and the report of doxyPEP ITU and 4CMenB ITU was more common among those at greater risk of STIs.

Identifiers

PMID39636892
PMCPMC11620361

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.