Perceptions, experiences and concerns with sexually transmitted infections among current and former PrEP users: a longitudinal qualitative study of gay, bisexual and queer men in Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background Pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) use has been attributed to heightened rates of sexually transmitted infections (STIs), ostensibly due to increased condomless anal sex (CAS) and greater frequency of STI testing. Few qualitative studies have assessed how gay, bisexual and queer men (GBQM) who use PrEP perceive STIs and how these attitudes have evolved post-PrEP uptake. We investigated the perspectives of current and former PrEP users on STIs. Methods Annual, in-depth longitudinal interviews were conducted with 38 current and former PrEP users in Ontario (n =18) and British Columbia (n =20), Canada, as part of a mixed-methods implementation science study (2020-2022). Over 3years, 109 interviews were conducted. Data analysis included reflexive thematic coding and longitudinal recurrent cross-sectional analysis using NVivo 12. Results Four STI-related themes emerged: (1) lack of STI-related concerns due to treatment and prevention optimism, (2) stigma-related concerns, (3) perceived risk among other PrEP users due to increased CAS, and (4) inconsistent testing concerns among non-PrEP users. Over time, some STI-related anxieties decreased with increased knowledge and reduced stigma. However, concerns persisted for other participants due to perceived risky sexual behaviours among other PrEP users and non-PrEP users. Both current and former PrEP users who expressed STI-related apprehensions consistently indicated adopting risk-reduction strategies, including condom use and having fewer sexual partners throughout the study. Conclusions Findings show how varied STI perceptions and experiences among current and former PrEP users shaped sexual decision-making over time. Providers, public health experts, and policymakers should develop a more comprehensive strategy to address STI concerns among GBQM.
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 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.015 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".