↓ Skip to main content

Perceived Social Norms About Oral PrEP Use: Differences Between African–American, Latino and White Gay, Bisexual and Other Men Who Have Sex with Men in Texas

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
facebook
1 Facebook page

Readers on

mendeley
113 Mendeley
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
Perceived Social Norms About Oral PrEP Use: Differences Between African–American, Latino and White Gay, Bisexual and Other Men Who Have Sex with Men in Texas
Published in
AIDS and Behavior, March 2018
DOI 10.1007/s10461-018-2076-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

Phillip W. Schnarrs, Danielle Gordon, Ryan Martin-Valenzuela, Thankam Sunil, Adolph J. Delgado, David Glidden, Jeffrey T. Parsons, Joe McAdams

Abstract

Correct and consistent condom use has been the primary method of HIV prevention until the FDA approve the use of PrEP in 2012. While strong evidence existing regarding the efficacy of PrEP, uptake has remained slower than anticipated. While work is underway to better understand the factors impacting uptake, the majority of this work as been focused on white gay, bisexual, and other men who have sex with men (GBMSM) living in metropolitan regions of the coastal U.S. The current study used a community-based framework to assess perceived social norms through a elicitation survey. A total of 104 GBMSM met inclusion criteria for the study. Several analytic categories emerged across questions and a number of differences were found across race and ethnicity such as who would approve or disapprove off PrEP and who would be likely to use PrEP. Further, we found differences between injunctive and descriptive norms. These findings suggest that there are unique factors contributing to PrEP uptake among racial and ethnic minority GBMSM and that to fully understand uptake a more robust measure of perceived norms may be needed.

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 113 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 113 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 12%
Student > Master 12 11%
Researcher 11 10%
Student > Bachelor 8 7%
Unspecified 7 6%
Other 24 21%
Unknown 38 34%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 18 16%
Social Sciences 17 15%
Nursing and Health Professions 10 9%
Psychology 8 7%
Unspecified 7 6%
Other 10 9%
Unknown 43 38%
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 05 February 2019.
All research outputs
#15,278,303
of 24,228,883 outputs
Outputs from AIDS and Behavior
#2,268
of 3,613 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#190,987
of 332,896 outputs
Outputs of similar age from AIDS and Behavior
#53
of 91 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,228,883 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,613 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 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% 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 332,896 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 91 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.