Perceived Barriers to and Facilitators of Long-Acting Injectable HIV PrEP Use Among Black, Hispanic/Latino, and White Gay, Bisexual, and Other Men Who Have Sex With Men
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Long-acting injectable pre-exposure prophylaxis (LAI-PrEP) was recently approved for HIV prevention as an alternative to daily oral PrEP. We explored preferences and attitudes toward LAI-PrEP among Black, Hispanic/Latino, and White gay, bisexual, and other men who have sex with men (GBM) using focus groups (n = 13) and in-depth interviews (n = 17). Participants expressed differing levels of interest in LAI-PrEP. While important benefits of LAI-PrEP included convenience, provider-facilitated PrEP discussion, and expansion of PrEP options, participants raised concerns about treatment efficacy and side effects, discomfort with needles/injections, cost, and frequency of clinic visits. Our findings highlight ongoing challenges with accessing HIV-prevention tools and provide guidance for developing strategies to enhance LAI-PrEP uptake among GBM.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".