↓ Skip to main content

“Losing the Phobia:” Understanding How HIV Pre-exposure Prophylaxis Facilitates Bridging the Serodivide Among Men Who Have Sex With Men

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Public Health, September 2018
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 (92nd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (92nd percentile)

Mentioned by

news
2 news outlets
blogs
1 blog
twitter
15 X users
facebook
3 Facebook pages

Readers on

mendeley
43 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
“Losing the Phobia:” Understanding How HIV Pre-exposure Prophylaxis Facilitates Bridging the Serodivide Among Men Who Have Sex With Men
Published in
Frontiers in Public Health, September 2018
DOI 10.3389/fpubh.2018.00250
Pubmed ID
Authors

Kimberly A. Koester, Xavier A. Erguera, Mi-Suk Kang Dufour, Ifeoma Udoh, Jeffrey H. Burack, Robert M. Grant, Janet J. Myers

Abstract

The use of HIV serostatus information has played a pivotal role in partner selection norms. A phenomenon known as serosorting is the practice of selecting a partner based on a perception that they are of the same HIV status in order to avoid transmission from one partner to the other. An understudied aspect of serosorting is that it has a divisive effect-one accepts or rejects a potential partner based on a singular characteristic, the partner's HIV status, and thus excludes all others. This division has been formally referred to as the HIV serodivide. In this study, we explored partner selection strategies among a group of HIV-negative, young men who have sex with men (n = 29) enrolled in a PrEP demonstration project in Northern California. We found that trends in serosorting were in fact shifting, and that a new and opposite phenomenon was emerging, something we labeled "seromixing" and that PrEP use played a part in why norms were changing. We present three orientations in this regard: (1) maintaining the phobia: in which men justified the continued vigilance and exclusion of people living with HIV as viable sex or romantic partners, (2) loosening/relaxation of phobia: among men who were reflecting on their stance on serosorting and its implications for future sexual and/or romantic partnerships, and (3) losing the phobia: among men letting go of serosorting practices and reducing sentiments of HIV-related stigma. The majority of participants spoke of changing or changed attitudes about intentionally accepting rather than rejecting a person living with HIV as a sex partner. For those who maintained strict serosorting practices, their understandings of HIV risk were not erased as a result of PrEP use. These overarching themes help explain how PrEP use is contributing to a closing of the HIV serodivide.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 15 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 43 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 43 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 5 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 7%
Student > Bachelor 3 7%
Professor 2 5%
Other 7 16%
Unknown 18 42%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Social Sciences 9 21%
Medicine and Dentistry 4 9%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 5%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 5%
Psychology 2 5%
Other 2 5%
Unknown 22 51%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 32. 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 26 September 2022.
All research outputs
#1,246,846
of 25,401,784 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Public Health
#613
of 14,097 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#26,145
of 345,692 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Public Health
#8
of 95 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,401,784 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 14,097 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.5. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% 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 345,692 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 92% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 95 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 92% of its contemporaries.