↓ Skip to main content

Pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) in an era of stalled HIV prevention: Can it change the game?

Overview of attention for article published in Retrovirology, April 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (70th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (70th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
5 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
50 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
217 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) in an era of stalled HIV prevention: Can it change the game?
Published in
Retrovirology, April 2018
DOI 10.1186/s12977-018-0408-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Robyn Eakle, Francois Venter, Helen Rees

Abstract

Pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) for HIV prevention has evolved significantly over the years where clinical trials have now demonstrated the efficacy of oral PrEP, and the field is scaling-up implementation. The WHO and UNAIDS have made PrEP implementation a priority for populations at highest risk, and several countries have developed guidelines and national plans accordingly, largely based on evidence generated by demonstration projects. PrEP presents the opportunity to change the face of HIV prevention by offering a new option for protection against HIV and disrupting current HIV prevention systems. Nevertheless, as with all new technologies, both practical and social requirements for implementation must be taken into account if there is to be sustained and widespread adoption, which will also apply to forthcoming prevention technologies. Defining and building success for PrEP within the scope of scale-up requires careful consideration. This review summarises where the PrEP field is today, lessons learned from the past, the philosophy and practicalities of how successful programming may be defined, and provides perspectives of costs and affordability. We argue that a successful PrEP programme is about effective intervention integration and ultimately keeping people HIV negative.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 217 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 217 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 38 18%
Student > Bachelor 28 13%
Researcher 17 8%
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 6%
Other 11 5%
Other 25 12%
Unknown 85 39%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 38 18%
Nursing and Health Professions 29 13%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 12 6%
Social Sciences 11 5%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 7 3%
Other 24 11%
Unknown 96 44%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 20 January 2021.
All research outputs
#5,306,642
of 24,920,664 outputs
Outputs from Retrovirology
#241
of 1,142 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#95,027
of 334,448 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Retrovirology
#6
of 17 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,920,664 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 75th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,142 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.2. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 334,448 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 17 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% of its contemporaries.