Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42224347›Full record

ArticlePLOS global public health2026

Barriers and facilitators to pre-exposure prophylaxis uptake among high-risk women and men who have sex with men in Georgia: A pre-implementation mixed-methods study using nominal group technique and the COM-B model.

Tamar Mgebrishvili, Irma Kirtadze, David Otiashvili, Mariam Sherozia, David Oliveros, Frederick L Altice

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PLOS global 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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Tamar MgebrishviliSchool of Natural Sciences and Medicine, Ilia State University, Tbilisi, Georgia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8584-7686
Irma KirtadzeAddiction Research Center, Alternative Georgia, Tbilisi, Georgia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7498-2380
David OtiashviliSchool of Natural Sciences and Medicine, Ilia State University, Tbilisi, Georgia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9604-9559
Mariam SheroziaSchool of Natural Sciences and Medicine, Ilia State University, Tbilisi, Georgia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0006-8286-003X
David OliverosSection of Infectious Diseases, Department of Internal Medicine, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut, United States of America.
Frederick L AlticeSection of Infectious Diseases, Department of Internal Medicine, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut, United States of America.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7860-693X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

While pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) research predominantly focuses on men who have sex with men (MSM), PrEP uptake among women who use drugs (WWUD), female sex workers (FSWs), and female partners of people who inject drugs (PWID) is limited. This study fills a critical gap in the literature by examining the unique barriers and facilitators to PrEP uptake among these under-researched female populations, relative to MSM. This pre-implementation study employed a human-centered design approach guided by the Capability, Opportunity, and Motivation-Behavior (COM-B) model. Five focus group sessions using nominal group technique (NGT) were conducted with 66 participants from key populations (MSM, WWUD, FSWs, and female partners of PWID) across three cities (Tbilisi, Kutaisi, and Batumi) to systematically generate and prioritize barriers and facilitators. This study applied the Behavior Change Wheel (BCW) framework to map identified barriers and facilitators to specific intervention functions, highlighting actionable strategies to improve PrEP uptake. Semi-structured interviews with healthcare providers were conducted to contextualize system-level factors. Participants prioritized 15 distinct barriers, with clear differences between groups. MSM most often identified opportunity-related barriers, such as rigid clinic hours, confidentiality concerns, and prior negative healthcare experiences. In contrast, women primarily reported informational and social barriers, including lack of accurate information about PrEP and eligibility, anticipated stigma, and fear of being seen at AIDS centers. Other top barriers included low perceived HIV risk and fear of social stigma. Key facilitators included providing PrEP in neutral, non-stigmatizing delivery settings (i.e., separate from AIDS centers or MSM-specific venues) and offering tele-PrEP and injectable options. Provider insights aligned with participant findings. Findings highlight the need for better access to information and alternative PrEP delivery strategies that decouple PrEP from AIDS centers and MSM-identified venues, including neutral access points, tele-PrEP models, pharmacy or primary care delivery to improve acceptability and reach among at-risk women.

Identifiers

PMID42224347
PMCPMC13225660

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.