ReviewCureus2025
Chemsex Interventions for Men Who Have Sex With Men: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Review in Cureus, 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.
- Chemsex and childhood trauma: evidence from a explorative matched case-control analysis.European archives of psychiatry and clinical neuroscience · 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
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Behavioural and pharmacological interventions aimed at reducing chemsex practices (the use of psychoactive drugs before or during sexual activity) have been introduced; however, the effectiveness of these interventions remains unclear. This systematic review aims to summarise the effectiveness of bio-behavioural chemsex interventions. PubMed and EMBASE databases were searched, without date and setting restrictions, for studies on chemsex interventions for men who have sex with men (MSM). Eligible studies were assessed, and data were extracted on primary outcomes (high-risk sexual behaviours) and secondary outcomes (sexually transmitted infections (STIs) and human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) incidence, adherence to post-exposure prophylaxis after sexual exposure (PEPSE) and anti-retroviral therapy (ART)). The results were presented quantitatively through a meta-analysis. A total of twelve studies (1,711 participants) were included in the review, while nine studies (1,145 participants) contributed to the meta-analysis. Bio-behavioural chemsex interventions decreased the number of episodes of unprotected anal intercourse (UAI) with serodiscordant partners (MD: -1.30, 95% CI: -1.58 to -1.03; p<0.001). Interventions also decreased the total number of sexual partners and the number of partners where UAI was used, though not significantly. The use of psychoactive substances during sexual activities was not reduced among those who had interventions. Bio-behavioural chemsex interventions reduce the risk of UAI with serodiscordant partners, a high-risk factor for HIV seroconversion. More research is needed on other benefits of chemsex interventions.
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.