Gay, bisexual, and queer men’s confidence in the Undetectable equals Untransmittable HIV prevention message: longitudinal qualitative analysis of the sexual decision-making of pre-exposure prophylaxis users over time
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Our objective was to understand what gay, bisexual, and queer men (GBQM) who had experience using pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) thought about the 'Undetectable equals Untransmittable' (U=U) message and how it informed their sexual decision-making over time. METHODS: We conducted annual longitudinal qualitative interviews (2020-22) with 17 current or former PrEP users as part of a mixed-methods implementation science study examining barriers and facilitators to PrEP awareness, access, and adherence. Over 3years, 47 interviews were conducted with GBQM in Ontario, Canada. Interviews were transcribed verbatim and coded in NVivo following reflexive thematic analysis. RESULTS: Participants' sexual health decision-making was informed by their confidence in biomedical HIV prevention and the person taking medication (i.e. themselves using PrEP versus a real/imagined person living with HIV (PLHIV)). Longitudinal narratives of U=U clustered around four overarching themes: (1) U=U confidence (i.e. increasing trust in U=U irrespective of their PrEP use); (2) PrEP confidence (i.e. accounts of self-reliance and PrEP as sufficient HIV protection); (3) combination confidence (i.e. trusting U=U and PrEP as a package); and (4) partner confidence (i.e. potential 'distrust' of U=U due to uncertainties about partners' medication adherence). Overall, men described increased sex with PLHIV over time, including some participants who, during earlier interviews, said they would 'never be comfortable' with serodifferent sexual partners. CONCLUSIONS: GBQM's use of PrEP shaped how they thought about U=U and sex with PLHIV. Although many GBQM embraced treatment as prevention/U=U as significant to their sexual lives, longitudinal analysis revealed its varied and uneven adoption across participants and time.
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 | 0.011 | 0.015 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".