Back

Preference heterogeneity for HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis care among gay, bisexual, and other men who have sex with men in the United States: a large discrete choice experiment

Patel, V. V.; Andrade, E.; Zimba, R.; Mirzayi, C.; Zhang, C.; Kharfen, M.; Doshi, R.; Nash, D.; Grov, C.

2024-05-31 hiv aids
10.1101/2024.05.30.24308102 medRxiv
Show abstract

BackgroundPrEP uptake among Black and Latino gay, bisexual, and other men who have sex with men (GBM) remains low in the United States. The design and implementation of PrEP delivery programs that incorporate the preferences of Black and Latino GBM may overcome barriers to uptake. We aimed to identify preferences for PrEP care among high-priority GBM in the U.S. with a large discrete choice experiment. MethodsWe conducted two discreet choice experiments (DCE) to elicit care preferences for (1) Starting PrEP and (2) Continuing PrEP care among GBM clinically indicated for PrEP. The DCE web-based survey was nested in a longitudinal cohort study of GBM in the U.S., implemented with video and audio directions among 16-49 year-old participants, not using PrEP, and verified to be HIV-negative. All participants were presented with 16 choice sets, with choices determined by BLGBM and PrEP implementation stakeholders. We calculated overall utility scores and relative importance and used latent class analyses (LCA) to identify classes within the Starting and Continuing PrEP DCE. Multivariable analysis was performed to identify factors associated with class membership. FindingsAmong 1514 participants, mean age was 32 years; 46{middle dot}5% identified as Latino, 21{middle dot}4% Black, and 25{middle dot}2 White; 37{middle dot}5% had an income less than USD $20,000. Two latent classes were identified for Starting PrEP: Class 1 (n=431 [28{middle dot}5%]) was driven by preference for more traditional in-person care, and Class 2 (n=1083 [71{middle dot}5%]) preferred flexible care options and on-demand PrEP. In a multivariable model, having a sexual health doctor (adjusted OR 0{middle dot}7, CI 0{middle dot}5, 0{middle dot}9), having a primary care provider (OR 0{middle dot}7,CI 0{middle dot}5, 0{middle dot}9, p= 0{middle dot}023), and concerns over PrEP side effects (OR 1{middle dot}1, CI 1{middle dot}0,1{middle dot}2, p= 0{middle dot}003) were all associated with class membership. InterpretationThe different preferences identified for PrEP care indicate the need for diverse care and formulation choices to improve PrEP uptake and persistence. Addressing these preferences and understanding the factors that shape them can inform the implementation of programs that increase PrEP uptake.

Matching journals

The top 3 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
Journal of the International AIDS Society
20 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
21.9%
2
JAIDS Journal of Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndromes
19 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
18.1%
3
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 18%
10.1%
50% of probability mass above
4
AIDS and Behavior
14 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
8.9%
5
BMJ Open
554 papers in training set
Top 4%
6.2%
6
Nature Human Behaviour
85 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
3.8%
7
AIDS
31 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
3.5%
8
PLOS Medicine
98 papers in training set
Top 1%
3.0%
9
International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health
124 papers in training set
Top 3%
2.3%
10
JAMA Network Open
127 papers in training set
Top 1%
2.3%
11
BMC Public Health
147 papers in training set
Top 2%
2.3%
12
Sexually Transmitted Infections
21 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
2.0%
13
JMIR Research Protocols
18 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
1.6%
14
PLOS Global Public Health
293 papers in training set
Top 4%
1.6%
15
Addiction
25 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
1.4%
16
American Journal of Epidemiology
57 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
1.4%
17
BMC Health Services Research
42 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.1%
18
Journal of Medical Internet Research
85 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.9%
19
Open Forum Infectious Diseases
134 papers in training set
Top 3%
0.7%
20
Pilot and Feasibility Studies
12 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
0.7%
21
Clinical Infectious Diseases
231 papers in training set
Top 5%
0.7%
22
BMJ Global Health
98 papers in training set
Top 3%
0.7%