ArticleAIDS and behavior2026
Estimating Prevention-Effective Adherence to HIV Pre-exposure Prophylaxis (PrEP) Among Australian Gay, Bisexual and Queer Men and Non-binary People: A Mixed-Methods Analysis.
Article in AIDS and behavior, 2026. 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
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Oral HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) is highly effective when taken appropriately at times of HIV risk, termed "prevention-effective adherence". To understand suboptimal adherence, we refined a brief measure for surveys among gay, bisexual and queer men and non-binary (GBQ+) people. We used a mixed-methods design, comprising a national, online cross-sectional survey (June-July 2023) and cognitive interviews (August-October 2023). Logistic regression identified characteristics of PrEP users who reported condomless anal intercourse with casual partners (CLAIC) that was not protected by their own PrEP use because they missed PrEP doses ("PrEP-unprotected CLAIC"). Cognitive interviews investigated whether the prevention-effective adherence measure was comprehensible. Of 2,046 survey respondents, 792 current PrEP users who had CLAIC in the past 6 months were included (Median age = 37, 86.7% gay, 34.5% non-daily-PrEP users). Of PrEP users who reported any CLAIC, 194 (24.5%) reported any PrEP-unprotected CLAIC. They were more likely to: be < 30 years old, be born in Asia vs. Australia, be part-time vs. full-time employed, use non-daily PrEP, have recently initiated PrEP, have experienced side effects from PrEP, and report recent sexualized drug use. They were less likely to find it easy to get PrEP. The 14 interviewees asked about the survey items (Mean age = 33; 50% gay; ) were able to answer the questions and reliably interpret the content. This first national estimate of prevention-effective adherence found that 24.5% of PrEP users who had CLAIC reported any PrEP-unprotected CLAIC. Targeted interventions in subgroups with more frequent PrEP-unprotected episodes must address side effects and other adherence barriers.
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.