ArticleAIDS research and therapy2026
Representativeness of participants in a randomized controlled trial on modalities of monitoring oral HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis use.
Article in AIDS research and therapy, 2026. 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.
- Trial
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
20 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundWe assessed whether participants in the EZI-PrEP study, a non-inferiority trial evaluating online and six-monthly monitoring of oral HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP), represent the broader population of PrEP users in the Netherlands.
methodsWe conducted a cross-sectional study using routinely collected data from September 2021 to August 2022 at four centres for sexual health (CSHs) in the Netherlands. Socio-demographic characteristics, sexual behaviour, and prevalence of bacterial STIs were compared between EZI-PrEP participants at baseline and other PrEP users during their first PrEP monitoring visit during the same period.
resultsThe analysis included 469 EZI-PrEP participants and 5161 other PrEP users, of whom 99% and 96% were men who have sex with men (MSM), respectively. EZI-PrEP participants were less often transgender or gender-divers persons (TGDP) (1% vs. 4%, p < 0.001), older (median age = 36 vs. 34 years, p = 0.004), more often born in the Netherlands (68% vs. 58%, p < 0.001), and more often completed a university/college degree (81% vs. 76%, p = 0.01). They also reported more group sex (38% vs. 33%, p = 0.023) and condomless anal sex (95% vs. 92%, p = 0.004), but less often sex work (1% vs. 6%, p < 0.001). Prevalence of bacterial STIs were no different between groups (19% vs. 18%, p = 0.77).
conclusionsThe comparable STI prevalence suggests no difference in risk for HIV acquisition among EZI-PrEP participants and other PrEP users, making study outcomes applicable to a broader population of PrEP users. However, under-representation of TGDPs, sex workers, individuals not born in the Netherlands, and individuals without university or college degree may limit generalizability.
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.