ArticleFrontiers in reproductive health2025
Women's preferences for integrating multi-product pre-exposure prophylaxis delivery programs within services for sexually transmitted infections and reproductive health care in Uganda: a discrete choice experiment.
Article in Frontiers in reproductive health, 2025. 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
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: HIV prevention is paramount for adolescent girls and young women (AGYW) in Uganda, and oral pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) is not always a suitable option. With emerging novel HIV prevention products (e.g., ring, injectables), there are opportunities to explore AGYW preferences to inform strategies for integrating PrEP choice into routine care. Methods: From January-September 2024, we recruited AGYW aged 16-25 years from community sites in Kampala, Uganda for a cross-sectional discrete choice experiment (DCE) to determine the most preferred attributes and levels of multi-product PrEP programs. The DCE was developed via literature review, informal conversations with AGYW, and cognitive interviewing among AGYW using a prototype instrument. In the final iteration, attributes (and levels) included: method of PrEP information dissemination (WhatsApp, brochure, in-person consultations), PrEP counseling delivery (virtual, group, in-person counselling), proximity of PrEP location (nearer to or far from work/school/home), type of facility (private or government clinic, pharmacy), availability of additional services (STI testing and treatment, family planning, no additional services), client wait times (5, 30, 90 min), and associated costs (small, none). Participants responded 9 times to the question "Which PrEP program would encourage you to use PrEP?" and each time a different set of randomly-assigned choices of 2 scenarios were presented. Multinomial logit modeling was used to estimate preference weights and importance scores. Results: Of 343 AGYW screened, 300 consented to participate (median age: 21 years, IQR: 20-23), with 38.3% having oral PrEP experience and 71.7% reporting recent condomless sex. "Access to other services" in conjunction with PrEP dispensing had the greatest influence on PrEP program choice (importance score: 27%) with preferences for STI testing and treatment (preference weight: 0.39, 95% CI: 0.32, 0.47) and family planning (PW: 0.14, 95% CI: 0.07, 0.21) greater than stand-alone PrEP programs. The type of facility offering PrEP (importance score: 9.7%), method used for PrEP information dissemination (importance score: 10.2%), and proximity of the PrEP location (importance score: 6.9%) were not very influential. Discussion: Young women's preference for PrEP services to be offered in conjunction with STI and/or reproductive health services indicates an opportunity to integrate current and future PrEP delivery within these existing services.
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.