↓ Skip to main content

Comfort Relying on HIV Pre-exposure Prophylaxis and Treatment as Prevention for Condomless Sex: Results of an Online Survey of Australian Gay and Bisexual Men

Overview of attention for article published in AIDS and Behavior, March 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
27 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
58 Mendeley
Title
Comfort Relying on HIV Pre-exposure Prophylaxis and Treatment as Prevention for Condomless Sex: Results of an Online Survey of Australian Gay and Bisexual Men
Published in
AIDS and Behavior, March 2018
DOI 10.1007/s10461-018-2097-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Martin Holt, Bridget L. Draper, Alisa E. Pedrana, Anna L. Wilkinson, Mark Stoové

Abstract

HIV-negative and untested gay and bisexual men from Victoria, Australia (n = 771) were surveyed during August-September 2016 about their comfort having condomless sex with casual male partners in scenarios in which pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) or treatment as prevention were used. Men not using PrEP were most comfortable with the idea of condomless sex with HIV-negative partners (31%), followed by partners using PrEP (23%). PrEP users were more comfortable with the idea of condomless sex with these partner types (64 and 72%, respectively). Very few men not taking PrEP were comfortable with condomless sex with HIV-positive partners (3%), even with undetectable viral loads (6%). PrEP users were more comfortable with condomless sex with HIV-positive partners (29%), and those with undetectable viral loads (48%). Being on PrEP, having recent condomless sex with casual partners or a HIV-positive regular partner were independently associated with comfort having condomless sex.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 58 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 58 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 17%
Student > Master 6 10%
Researcher 4 7%
Other 3 5%
Unspecified 3 5%
Other 9 16%
Unknown 23 40%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 13 22%
Social Sciences 4 7%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 7%
Unspecified 3 5%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 3%
Other 5 9%
Unknown 27 47%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 17 April 2018.
All research outputs
#14,845,872
of 23,849,058 outputs
Outputs from AIDS and Behavior
#2,178
of 3,566 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#189,999
of 334,387 outputs
Outputs of similar age from AIDS and Behavior
#52
of 92 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,849,058 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% 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 37th percentile – i.e., 37% 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 334,387 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 92 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.