↓ Skip to main content

No Evidence of Sexual Risk Compensation in the iPrEx Trial of Daily Oral HIV Preexposure Prophylaxis

Overview of attention for article published in PLOS ONE, December 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (99th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (98th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
20 news outlets
blogs
5 blogs
policy
2 policy sources
twitter
16 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page
wikipedia
2 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
201 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
277 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
No Evidence of Sexual Risk Compensation in the iPrEx Trial of Daily Oral HIV Preexposure Prophylaxis
Published in
PLOS ONE, December 2013
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0081997
Pubmed ID
Authors

Julia L. Marcus, David V. Glidden, Kenneth H. Mayer, Albert Y. Liu, Susan P. Buchbinder, K. Rivet Amico, Vanessa McMahan, Esper Georges Kallas, Orlando Montoya-Herrera, Jose Pilotto, Robert M. Grant

Abstract

Preexposure prophylaxis (PrEP) with emtricitabine/tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (FTC/TDF) reduced HIV acquisition in the iPrEx trial among men who have sex with men and transgender women. Self-reported sexual risk behavior decreased overall, but may be affected by reporting bias. We evaluated potential risk compensation using biomarkers of sexual risk behavior.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 16 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 277 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 5 2%
Brazil 2 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Unknown 268 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 58 21%
Researcher 40 14%
Student > Bachelor 30 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 24 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 22 8%
Other 55 20%
Unknown 48 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 96 35%
Social Sciences 31 11%
Psychology 22 8%
Nursing and Health Professions 20 7%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 14 5%
Other 31 11%
Unknown 63 23%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 215. 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 08 November 2021.
All research outputs
#185,160
of 25,845,895 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#2,750
of 225,390 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#1,598
of 322,679 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#75
of 5,571 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,845,895 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 225,390 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.8. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% 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 322,679 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 5,571 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its contemporaries.