The Use of Online Posts to Identify Barriers to and Facilitators of HIV Pre-exposure Prophylaxis (PrEP) Among Men Who Have Sex with Men: A Comparison to a Systematic Review of the Peer-Reviewed Literature.
The Use of Online Posts to Identify Barriers to and Facilitators of HIV Pre-exposure Prophylaxis (PrEP) Among Men Who Have Sex with Men: A Comparison to a Systematic Review of the Peer-Reviewed Literature.
复制标题
DOI：
10.1007/s10461-017-2011-3
复制
发表时间：
2018-04
影响因子：
4.4
通讯作者：
Patel VV
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Hannaford A;Lipshie-Williams M;Starrels JL;Arnsten JH;Rizzuto J;Cohen P;Jacobs D;Patel VV
暴露前预防(PrEP)在男男性行为者(MSM)中仍然是一种未得到充分利用的艾滋病毒预防工具。为了更全面地阐明美国男男性接触者使用PrEP的障碍和促进者，我们对有关PrEP的同行评议发表的文章和在线帖子的内容进行了系统的审查。我们使用网状标题和关于PrEP和/或HIV预防的关键词搜索同行评议数据库(Medline、Web of Science、Google Scholar)，从2005到2015年。我们纳入了美国MSM的原始研究，这些研究报告了与PrEP使用相关的障碍、促进剂或其他因素。我们还在不同的场所(Facebook、Slate Outside、Huffington Post Gay Voices、Queerty和My PrEP Experience博客)搜索在线帖子和相关评论(新闻文章、评论文章、博客和其他社交媒体帖子)，以确定有关PrEP的帖子。我们使用内容分析来确定主题，并比较同行评议的文学作品和在线帖子之间的潜在差异。我们确定了25篇同行评审的文章和28篇符合纳入标准的在线帖子。我们确定了使用PrEP的48个独特障碍和46个促进者。这94个主题分为六大类：(1)接近(n=14)，(2)态度/信仰(n=24)，(3)PrEP的属性(n=13)，(4)行为(n=11)，(5)社会人口特征(n=8)，(6)社会网络(n=6)。在所有类别中，通过对网上帖子的分析，确定了更多独特的主题。在网上帖子中确定了38个主题，这些主题在同行评议的文献中没有确定。我们确定了在线帖子中的障碍和促进者，这些障碍和促进者在对同行评议文献的系统审查中没有确定。通过纳入来自同行评议文章的系统审查和在线帖子的数据，我们已经确定了关于PrEP使用的障碍和促进者的突出和新颖的信息。传统的研究方法可能不能全面地捕捉当前对设计和实施PrEP相关干预措施至关重要的因素。
Pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) remains an under-utilized HIV prevention tool among men who have sex with men (MSM). To more comprehensively elucidate barriers and facilitators to PrEP use among US MSM, we conducted a systematic review of peer-reviewed published articles and content analysis of online posts about PrEP. We searched peer-reviewed databases (Medline, Web of Science, Google Scholar) using MESH headings and keywords about PrEP and/or HIV prevention from 2005 to 2015. We included original studies among MSM in the US that reported on barriers, facilitators, or other factors related to PrEP use. We also searched online posts and associated comments (news articles, opinion pieces, blogs and other social media posts) in diverse venues (Facebook, Slate Outward, Huffington Post Gay Voices, Queerty, and My PrEP Experience blog) to identify posts about PrEP. We used content analysis to identify themes and compare potential differences between the peer-reviewed literature and online posts. We identified 25 peer-reviewed articles and 28 online posts meeting inclusion criteria. We identified 48 unique barriers and 46 facilitators to using PrEP. These 94 themes fit into six overarching categories: (1) access (n = 14), (2) attitudes/beliefs (n = 24), (3) attributes of PrEP (n = 13), (4) behaviors (n = 11), (5) sociodemographic characteristics (n = 8), and (6) social network (n = 6). In all categories, analysis of online posts resulted in identification of a greater number of unique themes. Thirty-eight themes were identified in the online posts that were not identified in the peer-reviewed literature. We identified barriers and facilitators to PrEP in online posts that were not identified in a systematic review of the peer-reviewed literature. By incorporating data both from a systematic review of peer-reviewed articles and from online posts, we have identified salient and novel information about barriers to and facilitators of PrEP use. Traditional research approaches may not comprehensively capture current factors important for designing and implementing PrEP related interventions.
登录
查看更多内容
DOI：
10.1186/1748-5908-7-116
发表时间：
2012-11-26
期刊：
Implementation science : IS
影响因子：
--
作者：
Galindo GR;Garrett-Walker JJ;Hazelton P;Lane T;Steward WT;Morin SF;Arnold EA
通讯作者：
Arnold EA
影响因子：
9.9
作者：
Ben-Ze'ev, A
通讯作者：
Ben-Ze'ev, A
影响因子：
3.8
作者：
Bogaert, AF
通讯作者：
Bogaert, AF
影响因子：
4.4
作者：
Al-Tayyib, Alia A.;Thrun, Mark W.;Haukoos, Jason S.;Walls, N. Eugene
通讯作者：
Walls, N. Eugene
影响因子：
1.7
作者：
Brooks RA;Kaplan RL;Lieber E;Landovitz RJ;Lee SJ;Leibowitz AA
通讯作者：
Leibowitz AA