Trial reportJournal of acquired immune deficiency syndromes (1999)2025
Higher Acceptability of the Monthly Dapivirine Ring Versus Daily Oral Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis Among Adolescent Girls and Young Women in Sub-Saharan Africa in the REACH Trial.
Trial report in Journal of acquired immune deficiency syndromes (1999), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Long-acting HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis adherence and discontinuation: a global systematic review and meta-analysis.EClinicalMedicine · 2026Article
- Dose-ranging pharmacokinetics, safety, and efficacy of a 90-day intravaginal ring delivering islatravir in pigtail macaques.Science advances · 2026Article
- Preclinical Pharmacokinetics of a Triple-Combination Intravaginal Ring for HIV Prevention.Pharmaceutics · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
17 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundOral pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) is effective for HIV prevention , yet use has been inconsistent in adolescent girls and young women (AGYW). We compared PrEP with the dapivirine vaginal ring (ring) among AGYW in MTN-034 (REACH).
methodsWe randomized 247 16-21-yr-old AGYW (South Africa, Uganda, Zimbabwe) to the sequence of using the ring and oral PrEP for 6 m each (February 2019-September 2021). Participants rated overall product acceptability (1, dislike very much to 5, like very much) after 3 m and 6 m, and product characteristics/use attributes after 3 m. We compared proportions of participants rating each product a "5" (binomial model with generalized estimating equations). We assessed associations between product characteristics/use attribute ratings at 3 m and overall acceptability after 6 m (χ 2 ). RESULTSOVERALL,: 65% and 41% of participants rated the ring versus PrEP a "5" (adjusted risk difference [aRD] 24%, 95% CI: 15%, 32%; P < 0.001). For both products, high overall acceptability was associated with "excellent" self-rated adherence (ring, P < 0.001; PrEP, P = 0.03), product appearance (ring, P = 0.005; PrEP, P < 0.001), and ease of use (ring, P = 0.001; PrEP, P = 0.003). Not worrying about/or experiencing side effects were also associated with high acceptability of oral PREP.
conclusionsThe dapivirine ring was highly acceptable to substantially more individuals than oral PrEP, although a significant minority rated oral PrEP highly, even after using the ring. As has been found in the contraceptive field, offering AGYW a choice of PrEP products is likely to increase the use of any HIV prevention method in this vulnerable population.
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.