Trial reportAIDS and behavior2026
Characterizing the Role of Neighborhood Disadvantage in a Digital PrEP Intervention for Young Sexual and Gender Minority Men.
Trial report in AIDS and behavior, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
While digital health interventions (DHIs) have become an increasingly common approach to address HIV vulnerability among young sexual and gender minority men who have sex with men (YSGMMSM), few studies consider the role of neighborhood disadvantage in DHI efficacy and engagement. The present study is a secondary data analysis of 212 YSGMMSM aged 16-24 that combined biological and clinical survey data from the primary efficacy randomized controlled trial (RCT) of P3, a PrEP adherence DHI, with a measure of neighborhood disadvantage to characterize P3 engagement and efficacy among high and low disadvantage neighborhoods. We found that participants residing in high disadvantage neighborhoods engaged with P3 a median of 63 days (IQR = 39-76), compared to 77 days (IQR = 51-82) in low disadvantage neighborhoods. Among those who received the P3 intervention, participants residing in high disadvantage neighborhoods had higher odds of PrEP non-adherence (OR = 3.6, CI = 1.2, 10.4). Further, we found that there was minimal difference in PrEP non-adherence rates among those residing high disadvantage neighborhoods between intervention and control groups (28% vs. 25%) compared to 9% in the intervention condition and 18% in the control condition among those residing in low disadvantage neighborhoods. Despite this, receiving the P3 intervention did not moderate the relationship between neighborhood disadvantage and PrEP non-adherence. These findings suggest that neighborhood disadvantage may play a role in PrEP adherence DHI efficacy and engagement among YSGMMSM. Further research is needed to quantify the role of neighborhood disadvantage in YSGMMSM using HIV DHIs.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.