| Title |
The Roles of Technology in Primary HIV Prevention for Men Who Have Sex with Men
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Current HIV/AIDS Reports, October 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s11904-015-0293-5 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Patrick S. Sullivan, Jeb Jones, Nishant Kishore, Rob Stephenson |
| Abstract |
Men who have sex with men (MSM) are at disproportionate risk for HIV infection globally. The past 5 years have seen considerable advances in biomedical interventions to reduce the risk of HIV infection. To be impactful in reducing HIV incidence requires the rapid and expansive scale-up of prevention. One mechanism for achieving this is technology-based tools to improve knowledge, acceptability, and coverage of interventions and services. This review provides a summary of the current gap in coverage of primary prevention services, how technology-based interventions and services can address gaps in coverage, and the current trends in the development and availability of technology-based primary prevention tools for use by MSM. Results from agent-based models of HIV epidemics of MSM suggest that 40-50 % coverage of multiple primary HIV prevention interventions and services, including biomedical interventions like preexposure prophylaxis, will be needed to reduce HIV incidence among MSM. In the USA, current levels of coverage for all interventions, except HIV testing and condom distribution, fall well short of this target. Recent findings illustrate how technology-based HIV prevention tools can be used to provide certain kinds of services at much larger scale, with marginal incremental costs. A review of mobile apps for primary HIV prevention revealed that most are designed by nonacademic, nonpublic health developers, and only a small proportion of available mobile apps specifically address MSM populations. We are unlikely to reach the required scale of HIV prevention intervention coverage for MSM unless we can leverage technologies to bring key services to broad coverage for MSM. Despite an exciting pipeline of technology-based prevention tools, there are broader challenges with funding structures and sustainability that need to be addressed to realize the full potential of this emerging public health field. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 111 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | <1% |
| Brazil | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 109 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 19 | 17% |
| Student > Master | 14 | 13% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 11 | 10% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 8 | 7% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 8 | 7% |
| Other | 25 | 23% |
| Unknown | 26 | 23% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 29 | 26% |
| Social Sciences | 14 | 13% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 12 | 11% |
| Computer Science | 5 | 5% |
| Psychology | 5 | 5% |
| Other | 17 | 15% |
| Unknown | 29 | 26% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 27 September 2016.
All research outputs
#4,192,991
of 22,889,074 outputs
Outputs from Current HIV/AIDS Reports
#89
of 429 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#57,908
of 284,668 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Current HIV/AIDS Reports
#3
of 12 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,889,074 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 80th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 429 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.2. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 284,668 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 12 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its contemporaries.