↓ Skip to main content

Baseline Preferences for Daily, Event-Driven, or Periodic HIV Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis among Gay and Bisexual Men in the PRELUDE Demonstration Project

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Public Health, December 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (68th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (60th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
7 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Readers on

mendeley
57 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
Baseline Preferences for Daily, Event-Driven, or Periodic HIV Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis among Gay and Bisexual Men in the PRELUDE Demonstration Project
Published in
Frontiers in Public Health, December 2017
DOI 10.3389/fpubh.2017.00341
Pubmed ID
Authors

Stefanie J. Vaccher, Christopher Gianacas, David J. Templeton, Isobel M. Poynten, Bridget G. Haire, Catriona Ooi, Rosalind Foster, Anna McNulty, Andrew E. Grulich, Iryna B. Zablotska, On Behalf of the PRELUDE Study Team, Andrew Carr, Andrew Grulich, Anna McNulty, Brent Mackie, Cathy Pell, Catriona Ooi, Cheung Ching, Chris Gianacas, David Templeton, Dean Murphy, Edwina Wright, Garrett Prestage, Isobel Poynten, John de Wit, John Kaldor, John McAllister, Kenneth Mayer, Mark Bloch, Martin Holt, Nathan Ryder, Rebecca Guy, Rosalind Foster, Stefanie Vaccher

Abstract

The effectiveness of daily pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) is well established. However, there has been increasing interest in non-daily dosing schedules among gay and bisexual men (GBM). This paper explores preferences for PrEP dosing schedules among GBM at baseline in the PRELUDE demonstration project. Individuals at high-risk of HIV were enrolled in a free PrEP demonstration project in New South Wales, Australia, between November 2014 and April 2016. At baseline, they completed an online survey containing detailed behavioural, demographic, and attitudinal questions, including their ideal way to take PrEP: daily (one pill taken every day), event-driven (pills taken only around specific risk events), or periodic (daily dosing during periods of increased risk). Overall, 315 GBM (98% of study sample) provided a preferred PrEP dosing schedule at baseline. One-third of GBM expressed a preference for non-daily PrEP dosing: 20% for event-driven PrEP, and 14% for periodic PrEP. Individuals with a trade/vocational qualification were more likely to prefer periodic to daily PrEP [adjusted odds ratio (aOR) = 4.58, 95% confidence intervals (95% CI): (1.68, 12.49)], compared to individuals whose highest level of education was high school. Having an HIV-positive main regular partner was associated with strong preference for daily, compared to event-driven PrEP [aOR = 0.20, 95% CI: (0.04, 0.87)]. Participants who rated themselves better at taking medications were more likely to prefer daily over periodic PrEP [aOR = 0.39, 95% CI: (0.20, 0.76)]. Individuals' preferences for PrEP schedules are associated with demographic and behavioural factors that may impact on their ability to access health services and information about PrEP and patterns of HIV risk. At the time of data collection, there were limited data available about the efficacy of non-daily PrEP schedules, and clinicians only recommended daily PrEP to study participants. Further research investigating how behaviours and PrEP preferences change correspondingly over time is needed. ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02206555. Registered 28 July 2014.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 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 57 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 57 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 8 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 14%
Student > Master 6 11%
Student > Postgraduate 5 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 7%
Other 6 11%
Unknown 20 35%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 7 12%
Nursing and Health Professions 6 11%
Social Sciences 5 9%
Psychology 4 7%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 3 5%
Other 10 18%
Unknown 22 39%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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
#7,351,315
of 24,228,883 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Public Health
#2,629
of 12,245 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#139,101
of 447,443 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Public Health
#35
of 88 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,228,883 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 69th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 12,245 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.6. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% 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 447,443 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 68% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 88 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 60% of its contemporaries.