ArticleBMC public health2026
Outreach mpox vaccination at sex-on-premises venues in Sydney: an audit of a collaborative intervention by public health nurses and LGBTQI+ peer workers.
Article in BMC public health, 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
INTRODUCTION AND
aimsIn 2024, in response to a re-surge in mpox transmission in New South Wales, Australia, Kirketon Road Centre (KRC) partnered with an HIV and LGBTQI+ community organisation, ACON, to conduct outreach vaccination in two sex-on-premises venues (SOPVs), also known as "saunas". SOPV attendees were approached by an ACON peer worker who offered health education and referral to on-site mpox vaccination (Jynneos®) by a registered nurse. We aim to describe the scope, the acceptability, and the outcomes of mpox vaccination outreach at SOPVs in Sydney, and compare characteristics of people who received mpox vaccination at SOPVs to those who were vaccinated for mpox at a KRC's fixed-site vaccination clinic.
methodsIn addition to a descriptive analysis of service records, we matched individual-level records with Australian Immunisation Register (AIR) and ran (comparative) descriptive and multivariate analyses; a subset of people who were matched on AIR was analysed.
resultsDuring the outreach period, KRC administered 639 mpox vaccines at its fixed-site and conducted 22 outreach sessions at SOPVs in collaboration with ACON. These sessions resulted in 840 engagements; 522 individuals were eligible for mpox vaccination, 407 (78%) accepted referral to a nurse vaccinating onsite at SOPV, and n = 359 received mpox vaccine at SOPV. Among individuals who were matched on AIR, 77% at KRC's fixed-site and 66% at SOPV received two doses of mpox vaccine at some point. People who received at least one mpox vaccine at an SOPV were older (mean 46 vs. 39 years) and were less likely to: reside locally (34% vs. 51%), to have Medicare (57% vs. 74%), or to have an AIR record (60% vs. 67%) than people who were vaccinated at KRC's fixed site only. In a multivariate model, vaccine completion was not associated with receiving SOPV vs. KRC's fixed-site.
conclusionMpox outreach vaccination done in collaboration between nurses and LGBTQI+ peer-workers at SOPVs proved feasible, acceptable, and beneficial in terms of reaching people who may be out of area and not routinely engaged with sexual health services. Models of care that circumnavigate traditional geographic and local health service barriers should be considered during outbreaks, particularly those that build on established rapport within the communities at risk, such as MSM.
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.