Barriers to post exposure prophylaxis use among men who have sex with men in sub-Saharan Africa: An online cross-sectional survey
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Curbing new HIV infections among MSM in SSA remains problematic, due to cultural beliefs, norms that oppose same-sex acts, and criminalization of same-sex acts. No study focused on barriers to PEP use in SSA region has been conducted. Our study focused on identifying barriers to Post-Exposure Prophylaxis (PEP) use among MSM in sub-Saharan Africa (SSA). METHODS: An online cross-sectional survey was sent out to members of 14 Lesbian, Gay, Transgender, Bisexual, Queer (LGBTQ) associations in SSA, to identify barriers to PEP utilization in MSM. A total of 207 MSM from 22 countries in SSA completed the survey between 8 January 2019 and 23 February 2019. Descriptive statistics were generated, chi-square and backward stepwise logistic regression analysis were performed to evaluate the association between the outcome "PEP use" and other variables. RESULTS: Most of the MSM were aged 18 to 30, and the majority (220, 74.6%) described themselves as gay. Rwanda had the highest number of respondents (117, 39.7% of the total), followed by Nigeria, Ghana and South-Africa.The majority of respondents reported having heard about PEP (234, 80.7%), and the average PEP correct knowledge level was 59%.Five characteristics were associated with increased odds of using PEP: Age, having vocational education, having heard of PEP, knowledge of where to get PEP, and having been refused housing. CONCLUSION: There is a need for a collaborative effort between policy makers, key players in HIV prevention, and MSM associations in SSA to remove barriers to PEP uptake to promote optimal PEP utilization amongst MSM.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".