Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42083316›Full record

ArticleJournal of the International AIDS Society2026

Defining HIV Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis (PrEP) Persistence: A Scoping Review.

Sarah E Rutstein, Grace E Mulholland, Laura Limarzi-Klyn, Annabelle Gallinek, Nicole Brown, William C Miller

Abstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of the International AIDS Society, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Sarah E RutsteinSchool of Medicine, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, USA.
Grace E MulhollandGillings School of Global Public Health, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, USA.
Laura Limarzi-KlynGillings School of Global Public Health, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0003-8427-3347
Annabelle GallinekGillings School of Global Public Health, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, USA.
Nicole BrownSchool of Medicine, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0001-2486-2583
William C MillerGillings School of Global Public Health, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, USA.

Funding

National Institute of Allergy and Infectious DiseasesNIH HHS
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionWhen assessing the effectiveness of pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) programmes, interventions, or modalities, it is important to understand patterns of PrEP use. Continued use of PrEP is frequently referred to as PrEP "persistence." But persistence is not defined consistently, and differences impact the interpretation of study outcomes and public health policy. We conducted a scoping review to describe and compare definitions of PrEP persistence.

methodsWe searched PubMed, Embase, Scopus and Global Health records (01/01/2012-01/26/2026) for results that discussed longitudinal anti-HIV agents for HIV prevention. We included HIV, prevention and text variations of "persist-." We screened abstracts for relevance, reviewed relevant full-text articles, and then extracted key outcomes. Screening and extraction were performed independently by two investigators; conflicts were reviewed and resolved by a third.

resultsOur search returned 1549 de-duplicated results. We reviewed 362 full-text articles, yielding 147 studies for extraction. Approximately one-third (42/147, 29%) provided only qualitative persistence definitions. Among studies with operational definitions (105/147; 71%), three-quarters (80/105; 76%) considered a prescription refill and/or clinic visit date, and more than half (60/105; 57%) relied exclusively on these dates. Adherence (e.g. reported or measured drug taking) was commonly considered; 28% (29/105) of studies with an operational persistence definition included adherence assessment, and 11% (12/105) used only adherence to assess persistence. Thresholds used to classify persistent versus non-persistent PrEP use varied considerably. DISCUSSION: Definitions of PrEP persistence are heterogeneous. Most considered engagement in PrEP services (e.g. a clinic visit or medication refill), but nearly one-third included or relied exclusively on adherence measures. The differences in definitions have important implications for cross-study comparisons.

conclusionsThe heterogeneity observed among persistence definitions complicates comparisons of PrEP interventions and related public health decision-making. A single consensus definition of persistence is unlikely to suit all study settings, objectives, and designs; however, interpretability and comparability of results could be improved by increasing transparency and consistency in reporting. Our findings emphasize the importance of capturing clinically relevant, prevention-effective use when possible and of rigorously considering the implications of a chosen persistence definition on estimates and associated conclusions.

Indexed as

Anti-HIV AgentsHIV InfectionsPre-Exposure ProphylaxisHumansAnti-HIV AgentsadherenceengagementHIV preventionPrEPprevention‐effectivesurveillance

Identifiers

PMID42083316
PMCPMC13139717

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.