SynthesisPloS one2025
Acceptability and feasibility of pre-exposure prophylaxis for bacterial STIs: a systematic review.
Synthesis in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Perceptions and Acceptability of Doxycycline-Based STI Prophylaxis: Insights from Consumers and Healthcare Providers in Queensland.International journal of sexual health : official journal of the World Association for Sexual Health · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundA recent resurgence of bacterial sexually transmitted infections (STIs) is placing a major burden on high-risk populations, physicians, and the healthcare system. Treatment in the form of antibiotic pre-exposure prophylaxis (STI PrEP) is a potential solution. However, little is known about the acceptability and feasibility of this approach in high-risk populations.
methodsA comprehensive search strategy was developed and executed in October 2024 across six databases adhering to PRISMA guidelines.
resultsEight studies met the inclusion criteria. These studies were all conducted in high-income countries, used various methods, and all focussed on sexual minority men. Findings consistently identified moderate to high levels of acceptability among GBMSM (54.3% - 67.5%). Factors such as engagement in perceived 'high risk' sexual encounters, and past diagnosis of STIs strengthened acceptability, while others (e.g., antimicrobial resistance concerns and stigma) act as barriers. Only one study included the perspectives of healthcare workers, indicating a moderate willingness to prescribe, which would increase under governing-body endorsement. DISCUSSION: Overall, while there is some promise of STI PrEP acceptability among GBMSM, vast gaps in knowledge remain. Knowledge transfer and feasibility and, hence, the sustainability and capacity needed for the success of STI PrEP is yet to be examined and understood. However, for STI PrEP to be successfully adopted, it is essential not only to assess its acceptability and feasibility but also to focus on knowledge transfer. Knowledge transfer is a dynamic and iterative process, involving the synthesis, dissemination, exchange, and application of knowledge in an ethically sound manner. This process supports the improvement of health outcomes, strengthens healthcare systems, and ensures that healthcare interventions, such as STI PrEP, are effectively understood and implemented by both healthcare providers and at-risk populations. Similarly, the perspectives of populations beyond GBMSM have been omitted, and there is little understanding of the impact of their differing socio-cultural contexts around sex-related behaviour and Western pharmaceutical healthcare interventions on their acceptance and uptake.
conclusionFurther research into acceptability, feasibility and knowledge transfer among diverse high-risk groups, healthcare professionals, and policymakers is necessary to create a strong foundation for implementing STI PrEP.
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.