↓ Skip to main content

Lessons for Patient Education Around Long-Acting Injectable PrEP: Findings from a Mixed-Method Study of Phase II Trial Participants

Overview of attention for article published in AIDS and Behavior, July 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
23 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
89 Mendeley
Title
Lessons for Patient Education Around Long-Acting Injectable PrEP: Findings from a Mixed-Method Study of Phase II Trial Participants
Published in
AIDS and Behavior, July 2017
DOI 10.1007/s10461-017-1871-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Kathrine Meyers, Kristina Rodriguez, Atrina L. Brill, Yumeng Wu, Melissa La Mar, Debora Dunbar, Beryl Koblin, David Margolis, Magdalena E. Sobieszczyk, Hong Van Tieu, Ian Frank, Martin Markowitz, Sarit A. Golub

Abstract

This study aimed to identify patients' physical and psychosocial experiences of an investigational long-acting injectable PrEP product to aid in the development of patient and provider education materials. Twenty-eight participants of a Phase 2 safety, tolerability, and acceptability study of long-acting integrase inhibitor cabotegravir (CAB-LA) were interviewed on their physical and psychosocial experiences of the injections. Five themes emerged through a framework analysis on these interview transcripts: (1) injection-related pain is highly variable across individuals; (2) pain is more impactful after the injections than during; (3) patient anxiety is critical, but does not determine the experience of injections and decreases over time; (4) intimacy and awkwardness of gluteal injections impacts patients' experiences; (5) patient education and care strategies can mitigate the above factors. These findings can inform further sociobehavioral research within Phase 3 efficacy trials of CAB-LA, as well as patient education and provider guidance for future injectable PrEP products.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 89 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 89 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 10%
Student > Master 9 10%
Student > Bachelor 9 10%
Other 6 7%
Researcher 6 7%
Other 14 16%
Unknown 36 40%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 14 16%
Nursing and Health Professions 11 12%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 5 6%
Social Sciences 4 4%
Immunology and Microbiology 3 3%
Other 11 12%
Unknown 41 46%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 18 August 2017.
All research outputs
#19,246,640
of 23,849,058 outputs
Outputs from AIDS and Behavior
#3,007
of 3,566 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#245,211
of 318,640 outputs
Outputs of similar age from AIDS and Behavior
#69
of 81 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,849,058 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,566 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.0. This one is in the 8th percentile – i.e., 8% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 318,640 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 81 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 7th percentile – i.e., 7% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.