Inequities in access to HIV prevention services for transgender men: results of a global survey of men who have sex with men
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
INTRODUCTION: Free or low-cost HIV testing, condoms, and lubricants are foundational HIV prevention strategies, yet are often inaccessible for men who have sex with men (MSM). In the global context of stigma and poor healthcare access, transgender (trans) MSM may face additional barriers to HIV prevention services. Drawing on data from a global survey of MSM, we aimed to describe perceived access to prevention services among trans MSM, examine associations between stigma and access, and compare access between trans MSM and cisgender (non-transgender) MSM. METHODS: The 2014 Global Men's Health and Rights online survey was open to MSM (inclusive of trans MSM) from any country and available in seven languages. Baseline data (n=3857) were collected from July to October 2014. Among trans MSM, correlations were calculated between perceived service accessibility and anti-transgender violence, healthcare provider stigma, and discrimination. Using a nested matched-pair study design, trans MSM were matched 4:1 to cisgender MSM on age group, region, and HIV status, and conditional logistic regression models compared perceived access to prevention services by transgender status. RESULTS: About 3.4% of respondents were trans men, of whom 69 were included in the present analysis. The average trans MSM participant was 26 to 35 years old (56.5%); lived in western Europe, North America, or Oceania (75.4%); and reported being HIV-negative (98.6%). HIV testing, condoms, and lubricants were accessible for 43.5, 53.6, and 26.1% of trans MSM, respectively. Ever having been arrested or convicted due to being trans and higher exposure to healthcare provider stigma in the past six months were associated with less access to some prevention services. Compared to matched cisgender controls, trans MSM reported significantly lower odds of perceived access to HIV testing (OR=0.57, 95% CI=0.33, 0.98) and condom-compatible lubricants (OR=0.54, 95% CI=0.30, 0.98). CONCLUSIONS: This first look at access to HIV prevention services for trans MSM globally found that most reported inadequate access to basic prevention services and that they were less likely than cisgender MSM to have access to HIV testing and lubricants. Results indicate the need to enhance access to basic HIV prevention services for trans MSM, including MSM-specific services.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,002 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».