| Title |
Correlates of Awareness of and Willingness to Use Pre-exposure Prophylaxis (PrEP) in Gay, Bisexual, and Other Men Who Have Sex with Men Who Use Geosocial-Networking Smartphone Applications in New York City
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
AIDS and Behavior, March 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s10461-016-1353-6 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
William C. Goedel, Perry N. Halkitis, Richard E. Greene, Dustin T. Duncan |
| Abstract |
Geosocial-networking smartphone applications are commonly used by gay, bisexual, and other men who have sex with men (MSM) to meet sexual partners. The purpose of the current study was to evaluate awareness of and willingness to use pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) among MSM who use geosocial-networking smartphone applications residing in New York City. Recruitment utilizing broadcast advertisements on a popular smartphone application for MSM yielded a sample of 152 HIV-uninfected MSM. Multivariable models were used to assess demographic and behavioral correlates of awareness of and willingness to use PrEP. Most participants (85.5 %) had heard about PrEP but few (9.2 %) reported current use. Unwillingness to use PrEP was associated with concerns about side effects (PR = 0.303; 95 % CI 0.130, 0.708; p = 0.006). Given that more than half (57.6 %) of participants were willing to use PrEP, future research is needed to elucidate both individual and structural barriers to PrEP use among MSM. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 13 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 5 | 38% |
| Canada | 3 | 23% |
| Nigeria | 1 | 8% |
| Unknown | 4 | 31% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 9 | 69% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 15% |
| Scientists | 2 | 15% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 145 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 145 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 33 | 23% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 21 | 14% |
| Researcher | 19 | 13% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 10 | 7% |
| Other | 10 | 7% |
| Other | 27 | 19% |
| Unknown | 25 | 17% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 37 | 26% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 27 | 19% |
| Social Sciences | 18 | 12% |
| Psychology | 10 | 7% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 5 | 3% |
| Other | 17 | 12% |
| Unknown | 31 | 21% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. 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 10 September 2016.
All research outputs
#4,315,590
of 24,344,498 outputs
Outputs from AIDS and Behavior
#616
of 3,617 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#63,127
of 304,913 outputs
Outputs of similar age from AIDS and Behavior
#19
of 92 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,344,498 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 82nd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,617 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.0. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% 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 304,913 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 79% of its contemporaries.
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 has done well, scoring higher than 80% of its contemporaries.