ArticleSexual medicine2025
Awareness, use, and acceptability of HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis and post-exposure prophylaxis among men who have sex with men: evidence from China.
Article in Sexual medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Knowledge, attitude, and correlates of HIV post-exposure prophylaxis among medical students at three medical schools in China: a multi-center cross-sectional study.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- A comparative study of sociodemographic characteristics, health cognition, and risky sexual behaviors between MSMO and MSMW in Zhejiang Province, Eastern China.Frontiers in public health · 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Men who have sex with men (MSM) represent a high-incidence population with HIV, while HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) and post-exposure prophylaxis (PEP) are among the most effective interventions to prevent HIV transmission and save lives. Aim: This study aims to analyze the awareness, use, and acceptability of HIV PrEP and PEP among MSM to inform optimized implementation strategies for this population. Methods: A non-government organization based questionnaire survey was used to collect data from July 2022 to December 2023. A total of 1065 MSM were incorporated into our analysis with the following information: socio-demographics, awareness, use, and acceptability of HIV PrEP and PEP. Binary logistic regression analysis was employed to determine the factors on seeking, use, and acceptability of PrEP and PEP. Outcomes: Despite high awareness of PrEP/PEP, actual adoption remained limited among MSM. Results: The average age of the participants was 28.48 ± 7.33. About 89.7% of the participants were aware of PrEP and 94.4% were aware of PEP. About 7.9% of the participants have used PrEP and 11.6% have used PEP. About 87.9% of the participants had willingness to use PrEP and 90.2% had willingness to use PEP. The main ways for the participants to get PrEP and PEP were through Internet hospitals, followed by local hospitals, and recommendations from acquaintances. The most concerned factors were preventive effect followed by side effects of PrEP and PEP. Doubts about the preventive effect of PrEP and PEP significantly affect their seeking, use, and acceptability ( Clinical Translation: This study provides insights for enhancing the implementation of HIV PrEP and PEP among MSM. Strengths and Limitations: This study is the first to depict the situation of awareness, use, and acceptability of HIV PrEP and PEP among MSM in China. Limitations involve social desirability bias and reliance on self-reported diagnosis. Conclusion: Accelerating PrEP/PEP scale-up requires enhanced risk perception, expanded service access, and comprehensive sensitization programs.
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.