MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4406097990 · doi:10.2196/65713

HIV Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis Cascade Stages Among Men Who Have Sex With Men With Sexually Transmitted Infections in China: Multicenter Cross-Sectional Survey Study

2024· article· en· W4406097990 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Xue Yang, Wenting Kang, Zhuoer Zhang, Houlin Tang, Dapeng Zhang, Lijun Sun, Zaicun Li

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Public Health and Surveillance · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHIV/AIDS Research and Interventions
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPre-exposure prophylaxisCross-sectional studyMedicineMen who have sex with menHuman immunodeficiency virus (HIV)Multicenter studyEnvironmental healthChinaVirologyDemographySyphilisGeographyInternal medicineRandomized controlled trial

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: There is limited literature available regarding the knowledge and use of HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) among men who have sex with men (MSM) with sexually transmitted infections (STIs). Objective: This study's objective was to explore the HIV PrEP cascade stages (knowledge, willingness to use, and use) among MSM with STIs in China, in order to promote the implementation of PrEP in this population. Methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted using a respondent-driven sampling method in 19 cities in China, from January to August 2022. The study collected data on demographics, behaviors, and PrEP cascade stages from participants who were not infected with HIV and who self-reported being recently infected with STIs. After using chi-square tests or Fisher exact tests to analyze differences in the knowledge of PrEP, willingness to use PrEP, and PrEP use across different variables, multivariate logistic regression was used to analyze the influences of the different variables on PrEP cascade stages. Results: By August 2022, following screening and exclusion, a total of 1329 MSM were included in the study. Among them, 85.55% (n=1137) had heard of PrEP, 81.57% (n=1084) expressed their willingness to use PrEP if engaging in high-risk HIV behaviors, 70.58% (n=938) had consulted a health care professional about PrEP, 62.98% (n=837) reported having used PrEP, and 46.35% (n=616) possessed a basic understanding of PrEP. The results of multivariate logistic regression analyses showed that the same factors significantly influenced both knowledge of PrEP and willingness to take PrEP, including age, education, marital status, income, condom usage, participation in group sex, HIV status of the most recent male sexual partner, and postexposure prophylaxis (PEP) usage. The factors significantly related to the PrEP use included income, engagement in commercial sex, participation in group sex, HIV status of the most recent male sexual partner, new drug usage, and PEP usage. Conclusions: MSM with STIs were engaged with the PrEP cascade stages at a relatively high rate, but they lacked an understanding of PrEP and underestimated HIV risk. The prevalence of having a basic understanding of PrEP was lower than PrEP usage, and this suboptimal awareness could impede PrEP efficacy and lead to risk compensation.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.029
Threshold uncertainty score0.057

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.020
GPT teacher head0.347
Teacher spread0.328 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Public Health and Surveillance→Same topicHIV/AIDS Research and Interventions→French-language works237,207→