HIV Prevention, PrEP Uptake
Conditions
Keywords
PrEP, HIV prevention, Public Health Social Media Campaign, Peer Intervention
Brief summary
The purpose of this study is to test the feasibility, acceptability, and preliminary efficacy of E-PrEP on reaching young men of color who have sex with men (YMCSM) at high-risk of HIV infection to reduce HIV acquisition. E-PrEP is a peer-designed social media-based health intervention to increase PrEP awareness, knowledge, and motivation as a tool for HIV prevention and to increase linkage to primary care.
Detailed description
This study examines a social media based peer-led and delivered intervention focused on increasing PrEP adoption in young men of color who have sex with men (YMCSM). While prior efficacy trials have included YMCSM 18-29, we will focus on PrEP in YMCSM outside clinical trial settings. Rather than an alternative medium for implementation of existing interventions designed for in-person contact, social media may be a true 'game changer' to engage hard to reach individuals. While many online behavioral interventions exist, including some that use social media, this will be one of the few studies to use and test social media to facilitate uptake of a biomedical intervention. E-PrEP will connect the target population (YMCSM) to a new prevention tool (PrEP) through rapid linkage to medical care, accelerating diffusion of PrEP. Given the paucity of data regarding social media-based interventions to change health-related behavior, E-PrEP may have a marked impact on future bio-behavioral interventions, especially those that include diffusion of innovation. Social media offers the power of scale and efficiency for large potential impact, even with relatively low-intensity interventions. Similarly, PrEP, if widely adopted in high-risk populations and offered with behavioral interventions, could markedly decrease HIV infection rates. Social media-based, peer-led approaches like E-PrEP could be used to enhance efforts by community-based and other organizations that employ internet-assisted or peer-outreach strategies to improve health. Primary Aim: To test the feasibility and preliminary efficacy of E-PrEP for increasing PrEP adoption in a cluster-randomized controlled trial.
Interventions
BEHAVIORALE-PrEP- Peer-Led Intervention about PrEP
Intervention contents and targets were informed by a systematic review of PrEP barriers and facilitators, a locally conducted qualitative study, and key informant and peer leader inputs. The contents were developed or adapted by study staff and peer leaders. Components and associated text have been designed to engage participants in online discussions about PrEP and related health and social topics. Posts will also include information about linkage-to-care, and insurance access. New contents will be posted almost daily.
BEHAVIORALBxNow - General Health Campaign
BxNow will focus on general health topics unrelated to HIV or sexual health (i.e. fitness, nutrition, smoking), as chosen by PLs. Contents will be developed or adapted by PLs and posted almost daily. Posts will also include information about linkage-to-care and insurance access. At the end of the intervention, BxNow participants will be exposed to E-PrEP components at the end of the trial.
Sponsors
National Institutes of Health (NIH)
Albert Einstein College of Medicine
National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH)
Montefiore Medical Center
Study design
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
PREVENTION
Masking
DOUBLE (Subject, Outcomes Assessor)
Masking description
Both Peer Leaders and participants will be masked to the group randomized to. The statistician, who will be analyzing the data, will also be masked to group assignment.
Intervention model description
There will be two groups of Peer Leaders recruited. One group of Peer Leaders will be randomized to deliver the E-PrEP intervention and the second group of peer leaders will be randomized to deliver a general health campaign (control).
Eligibility
Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
18 Years to 29 Years
Healthy volunteers
Yes
Inclusion criteria
* Male or Transgender individual; Ages 18-29; Have had unprotected anal sex with a male partner in the prior 12 months; Fluent in English or Spanish; Are HIV-negative or unknown status (self-report); Identify as Black and/or Latino
Exclusion criteria
* YMCSM who do not consent/assent to study; not currently using at least one of 2 social media sites that will be used for the E-PrEP intervention (not using Facebook, or Instagram), and do not live in New York City.
Design outcomes
Primary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Number of Participants Using PrEP Over Time | at baseline, 6 weeks, and 12 weeks | This outcome is the number of participants who self-report using PrEP at baseline, 6 weeks, or 12 weeks. This was measure by a yes/no question asking if the participant currently uses PrEP (dichotomous variable). |
| Number of Participants Intending to Start Using PrEP Over Time | baseline, 6 weeks, and 12 weeks | This primary outcome is intention to use PrEP in the next month measured at baseline, 6 weeks, and 12 weeks. This was assessed with a yes/no question (dichotomous variable). However, this variable does not include anyone who reported PrEP use at either 6 or 12 weeks. This outcome will inform sample size calculations for a subsequent fully powered trial. |
Secondary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| PrEP Awareness | baseline, 6 weeks, 12 weeks | Awareness about PrEP. PrEP awareness was measured with one question, scored 1 to 5. The mean for each arm was calculated at each time point. The higher the score, the higher the level of awareness about PrEP. |
| PrEP Stigma | baseline, 6 weeks, 12 weeks | Any stigma the participant might have about PrEP or those who use PrEP To measure PrEP Stigma we asked 3 questions, using a Likert scale (from 1-4; 1= Strongly Disagree, 4=Strongly Agree). The scores were summed for each participant. The scores range from 1-12, with higher scores indicating higher levels of PrEP Stigma. The higher the score, the higher the level of PrEP stigma. |
| Change in PrEP Knowledge | at baseline, 6 weeks, and 12 weeks | Self-reported PrEP related knowledge. Participants were asked two questions about PrEP knowledge. For each question, they got one point if the answer was correct. Scale range from 0-2. The score were added and the average of the sum was reported. The higher the score, the higher the knowledge of PrEP. |
| Communication About PrEP | baseline, 6 weeks, 12 weeks | Discussion of PrEP with friends, partners, or family. Communication about PrEP was measured with 2 questions, using a Likert scale ( from 1-5;1=Not at all, 5= Extremely). The scores of the 2 questions were summed for each participant. The scores range from 1-10, with higher the score indicating higher the level of communication about PrEP (i.e. higher scores indicates participants communicating more about PrEP). |
| PrEP Barriers | baseline, 6 weeks, 12 weeks | Any Barriers to PrEP uptake. To measure barriers to PrEP uptake, 7 items were used. Each item was measured using a likert scale ( from 1-4; 1=Strongly Disagree, 4= Strongly Agree). The scores of each question were summed for each participant (scale scores ranged 1-28, with higher scores indicating higher levels of PrEP Barriers). The higher the score, the higher the number of PrEP Barriers. |
| Self-efficacy About Using PrEP | at baseline, 6 weeks, and 12 weeks | Self-reported answer to questions about self-efficacy of using PrEP. There were two questions to measure self-efficacy of PrEP using a Likert scale (ranging from 1-5; 1=Not at all, 5=Extremely). The scores from both questions were summed for each participant. The scale range from 1-10 with higher scores indicating higher the levels of PrEP self-efficacy. |
Other
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Number of Participants With Self-reported HIV Testing | at baseline, 6 weeks, and 12 weeks | Self-reported HIV testing at baseline, 6 weeks, and 12 weeks. |
| Number of Participants With Self-reported Linkage-to-Care | at baseline, 6 weeks, and 12 weeks | Self-reported information about health care access (i.e. going to a medical appointment). |
| Trust in the Peer by Participant | at baseline and 6 weeks | The scale measure the level of trust the Participant had on the Peer's online post. Trust in the Peer Leader was measured using 4 questions, each scored from 1-7 (1=Strongly Disagree, 7=Strongly Agree). The score for the 4 questions was summed for each participant. The score ranged from 1-28 with higher scores indicating a higher level of trust the participant had in their Peer Leader. |
Countries
United States
Participant flow
Participants by arm
| Arm | Count |
|---|---|
| E-PrEP- Peer-Led Intervention About PrEP We recruited Peer Leaders over a 5-week period and then randomly assigned them to the 2 arms. Peer Leaders were blinded to their study condition. Peer leaders recruited study participants via their existing online social networks to complete an online eligibility screener and baseline survey. Study participants were then directed to join a private online group, facilitated and moderated by the peer leader who had recruited them.
Content: The E-PrEP campaign focused on delivering information about PrEP. The materials were composed of 6 weeks of publicly available PrEP educations materials selected by peer advisors prior to the intervention (i.e. information on how to talk to your doctor about PrEP, where to get PrEP, side effects, etc.). The materials mapped out onto Diffusion of Innovation (DOI) and Information, Motivation, Behavior (IMB) domains. Peer leaders framed the E-PrEP materials in their own words when posting the materials to their online private group. | 81 |
| BxNow- General Health Control Arm We recruited Peer Leaders over a 5-week period and then randomly assigned them to the 2 arms. Peer Leaders were blinded to their study condition. Peer leaders recruited study participants via their existing online social networks to complete an online eligibility screener and baseline survey. Study participants were then directed to join a private online group, facilitated and moderated by the peer leader who had recruited them.
Content: BxNow focused on a broad range of health topics prioritized by the peer leaders assigned to this arm, but did not include any contents about HIV or PrEP (i.e. depression, anxiety, suicide, intimate partner violence, drug use, awareness of sexually transmitted infections). BxNow was attention matched to the E-PrEP intervention timeline (6 weeks of materials) for both time and day of posts and frequency of posts. As with E-PrEP, standardized BxNow contents were delivered by peer leaders, framed using their own words. | 71 |
| Total | 152 |
Withdrawals & dropouts
| Period | Reason | FG000 | FG001 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Overall Study | Lost to Follow-up | 9 | 4 |
Baseline characteristics
| Characteristic | E-PrEP- Peer-Led Intervention About PrEP | BxNow- General Health Control Arm | Total |
|---|---|---|---|
| Age, Continuous | 24.28 years STANDARD_DEVIATION 2.83 | 23.32 years STANDARD_DEVIATION 3.39 | 23.84 years STANDARD_DEVIATION 2.83 |
| Education Level College and Beyond | 17 Participants | 9 Participants | 26 Participants |
| Education Level High School or Less | 36 Participants | 27 Participants | 63 Participants |
| Education Level Some College | 28 Participants | 35 Participants | 63 Participants |
| Employment Disable | 3 Participants | 2 Participants | 5 Participants |
| Employment Full Time | 24 Participants | 29 Participants | 53 Participants |
| Employment Part Time | 17 Participants | 15 Participants | 32 Participants |
| Employment Student | 12 Participants | 13 Participants | 25 Participants |
| Employment Unemployed | 31 Participants | 15 Participants | 46 Participants |
| Health Insurance I don't kno | 2 Participants | 2 Participants | 4 Participants |
| Health Insurance No | 18 Participants | 10 Participants | 28 Participants |
| Health Insurance Yes | 61 Participants | 59 Participants | 120 Participants |
| Income $10,000-$19,999 | 11 Participants | 10 Participants | 21 Participants |
| Income $20,000-$29,999 | 13 Participants | 6 Participants | 19 Participants |
| Income $30,000-$39,999 | 11 Participants | 16 Participants | 27 Participants |
| Income $40,000-more | 8 Participants | 10 Participants | 18 Participants |
| Income Less than $10,000 | 26 Participants | 15 Participants | 41 Participants |
| Income None | 12 Participants | 14 Participants | 26 Participants |
| Living Situation Alone | 11 Participants | 4 Participants | 15 Participants |
| Living Situation Don't have a place to live | 4 Participants | 2 Participants | 6 Participants |
| Living Situation Parents/Family | 29 Participants | 36 Participants | 65 Participants |
| Living Situation Partner/Boyfriend/Husband | 2 Participants | 7 Participants | 9 Participants |
| Living Situation Roomates | 20 Participants | 14 Participants | 34 Participants |
| Living Situation Temporary Living Situation | 15 Participants | 7 Participants | 22 Participants |
| Living Situation Wife/Females Partner/Girlfriend | 0 Participants | 1 Participants | 1 Participants |
| Race/Ethnicity, Customized Race/Ethnicity Latinx/Hispanic | 26 Participants | 47 Participants | 73 Participants |
| Race/Ethnicity, Customized Race/Ethnicity Non-Hispanic Black | 55 Participants | 24 Participants | 79 Participants |
| Residence Bronx | 44 Participants | 35 Participants | 79 Participants |
| Residence Brooklyn | 18 Participants | 14 Participants | 32 Participants |
| Residence Manhattan | 16 Participants | 13 Participants | 29 Participants |
| Residence Queens | 2 Participants | 8 Participants | 10 Participants |
| Residence Staten Island | 1 Participants | 1 Participants | 2 Participants |
| Sex/Gender, Customized Gender Identity Female/Transfemale | 7 Participants | 3 Participants | 10 Participants |
| Sex/Gender, Customized Gender Identity Gender Non-conforming/Gender Non-Binary | 2 Participants | 0 Participants | 2 Participants |
| Sex/Gender, Customized Gender Identity Male | 68 Participants | 64 Participants | 132 Participants |
| Sex/Gender, Customized Gender Identity Queer | 3 Participants | 4 Participants | 7 Participants |
| Sex/Gender, Customized Gender Identity Transmale | 1 Participants | 0 Participants | 1 Participants |
| Sexual Identity Bisexual | 7 Participants | 10 Participants | 17 Participants |
| Sexual Identity Gay/Homosexual | 60 Participants | 56 Participants | 116 Participants |
| Sexual Identity Heterosexual/Straight | 1 Participants | 1 Participants | 2 Participants |
| Sexual Identity Other | 1 Participants | 1 Participants | 2 Participants |
| Sexual Identity Queer | 12 Participants | 3 Participants | 15 Participants |
Adverse events
| Event type | EG000 affected / at risk | EG001 affected / at risk |
|---|---|---|
| deaths Total, all-cause mortality | 0 / 81 | 0 / 71 |
| other Total, other adverse events | 0 / 81 | 0 / 71 |
| serious Total, serious adverse events | 0 / 81 | 0 / 71 |
Outcome results
Primary
Number of Participants Intending to Start Using PrEP Over Time
This primary outcome is intention to use PrEP in the next month measured at baseline, 6 weeks, and 12 weeks. This was assessed with a yes/no question (dichotomous variable). However, this variable does not include anyone who reported PrEP use at either 6 or 12 weeks. This outcome will inform sample size calculations for a subsequent fully powered trial.
Time frame: baseline, 6 weeks, and 12 weeks
Population: Each of the rows indicates the number of participants who indicated intending to use PrEP at each time point (Baseline vs. 6 weeks vs. 12 weeks).
| Arm | Measure | Group | Category | Value (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| E-PrEP- Peer-Led Intervention About PrEP | Number of Participants Intending to Start Using PrEP Over Time | Baseline | Yes | 32 Participants |
| E-PrEP- Peer-Led Intervention About PrEP | Number of Participants Intending to Start Using PrEP Over Time | Baseline | No | 33 Participants |
| E-PrEP- Peer-Led Intervention About PrEP | Number of Participants Intending to Start Using PrEP Over Time | 6 Weeks | Yes | 23 Participants |
| E-PrEP- Peer-Led Intervention About PrEP | Number of Participants Intending to Start Using PrEP Over Time | 6 Weeks | No | 42 Participants |
| E-PrEP- Peer-Led Intervention About PrEP | Number of Participants Intending to Start Using PrEP Over Time | 12 Weeks | Yes | 27 Participants |
| E-PrEP- Peer-Led Intervention About PrEP | Number of Participants Intending to Start Using PrEP Over Time | 12 Weeks | No | 38 Participants |
| BxNow- General Health Control Arm | Number of Participants Intending to Start Using PrEP Over Time | 12 Weeks | Yes | 32 Participants |
| BxNow- General Health Control Arm | Number of Participants Intending to Start Using PrEP Over Time | Baseline | Yes | 34 Participants |
| BxNow- General Health Control Arm | Number of Participants Intending to Start Using PrEP Over Time | 6 Weeks | No | 36 Participants |
| BxNow- General Health Control Arm | Number of Participants Intending to Start Using PrEP Over Time | Baseline | No | 29 Participants |
| BxNow- General Health Control Arm | Number of Participants Intending to Start Using PrEP Over Time | 12 Weeks | No | 31 Participants |
| BxNow- General Health Control Arm | Number of Participants Intending to Start Using PrEP Over Time | 6 Weeks | Yes | 27 Participants |
Comparison: At 6 weeks.p-value: 0.578395% CI: [-0.04676, 0.02776]Mixed Models Analysis
Comparison: At 12 weeks.p-value: 0.318595% CI: [-0.05318, 0.01933]Mixed Models Analysis
Primary
Number of Participants Using PrEP Over Time
This outcome is the number of participants who self-report using PrEP at baseline, 6 weeks, or 12 weeks. This was measure by a yes/no question asking if the participant currently uses PrEP (dichotomous variable).
Time frame: at baseline, 6 weeks, and 12 weeks
| Arm | Measure | Group | Category | Value (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| E-PrEP- Peer-Led Intervention About PrEP | Number of Participants Using PrEP Over Time | Baseline | Yes | 13 Participants |
| E-PrEP- Peer-Led Intervention About PrEP | Number of Participants Using PrEP Over Time | Baseline | No | 52 Participants |
| E-PrEP- Peer-Led Intervention About PrEP | Number of Participants Using PrEP Over Time | 6 weeks | Yes | 17 Participants |
| E-PrEP- Peer-Led Intervention About PrEP | Number of Participants Using PrEP Over Time | 6 weeks | No | 48 Participants |
| E-PrEP- Peer-Led Intervention About PrEP | Number of Participants Using PrEP Over Time | 12 weeks | Yes | 14 Participants |
| E-PrEP- Peer-Led Intervention About PrEP | Number of Participants Using PrEP Over Time | 12 weeks | No | 51 Participants |
| BxNow- General Health Control Arm | Number of Participants Using PrEP Over Time | 12 weeks | Yes | 13 Participants |
| BxNow- General Health Control Arm | Number of Participants Using PrEP Over Time | Baseline | Yes | 11 Participants |
| BxNow- General Health Control Arm | Number of Participants Using PrEP Over Time | 6 weeks | No | 52 Participants |
| BxNow- General Health Control Arm | Number of Participants Using PrEP Over Time | Baseline | No | 52 Participants |
| BxNow- General Health Control Arm | Number of Participants Using PrEP Over Time | 12 weeks | No | 50 Participants |
| BxNow- General Health Control Arm | Number of Participants Using PrEP Over Time | 6 weeks | Yes | 11 Participants |
Comparison: At 6 weeks.p-value: 0.0786395% CI: [-0.00516, 0.07863]Mixed Models Analysis
Comparison: At 12 weeks.p-value: 0.199995% CI: [-0.01648, 0.06836]Mixed Models Analysis
Secondary
Change in PrEP Knowledge
Self-reported PrEP related knowledge. Participants were asked two questions about PrEP knowledge. For each question, they got one point if the answer was correct. Scale range from 0-2. The score were added and the average of the sum was reported. The higher the score, the higher the knowledge of PrEP.
Time frame: at baseline, 6 weeks, and 12 weeks
| Arm | Measure | Group | Value (MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| E-PrEP- Peer-Led Intervention About PrEP | Change in PrEP Knowledge | Baseline | 1.86 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 0.43 |
| E-PrEP- Peer-Led Intervention About PrEP | Change in PrEP Knowledge | 6 Weeks | 1.86 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 0.39 |
| E-PrEP- Peer-Led Intervention About PrEP | Change in PrEP Knowledge | 12 Weeks | 1.83 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 0.49 |
| BxNow- General Health Control Arm | Change in PrEP Knowledge | Baseline | 1.7 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 0.59 |
| BxNow- General Health Control Arm | Change in PrEP Knowledge | 6 Weeks | 1.83 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 0.46 |
| BxNow- General Health Control Arm | Change in PrEP Knowledge | 12 Weeks | 1.73 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 0.55 |
Comparison: At 6 weeks.p-value: 0.8963Mixed Models Analysis
Comparison: At 12 weeksp-value: 0.3229Mixed Models Analysis
Secondary
Communication About PrEP
Discussion of PrEP with friends, partners, or family. Communication about PrEP was measured with 2 questions, using a Likert scale ( from 1-5;1=Not at all, 5= Extremely). The scores of the 2 questions were summed for each participant. The scores range from 1-10, with higher the score indicating higher the level of communication about PrEP (i.e. higher scores indicates participants communicating more about PrEP).
Time frame: baseline, 6 weeks, 12 weeks
| Arm | Measure | Group | Value (MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| E-PrEP- Peer-Led Intervention About PrEP | Communication About PrEP | Baseline | 8.42 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 2.38 |
| E-PrEP- Peer-Led Intervention About PrEP | Communication About PrEP | 6 Weeks | 9.14 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 1.47 |
| E-PrEP- Peer-Led Intervention About PrEP | Communication About PrEP | 12 Weeks | 8.94 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 1.81 |
| BxNow- General Health Control Arm | Communication About PrEP | Baseline | 8.24 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 2.29 |
| BxNow- General Health Control Arm | Communication About PrEP | 6 Weeks | 8.60 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 1.85 |
| BxNow- General Health Control Arm | Communication About PrEP | 12 Weeks | 8.32 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 2.14 |
Comparison: At 6 weeks.p-value: 0.0124Mixed Models Analysis
Comparison: At 12 weeks.p-value: 0.0022Mixed Models Analysis
Secondary
PrEP Awareness
Awareness about PrEP. PrEP awareness was measured with one question, scored 1 to 5. The mean for each arm was calculated at each time point. The higher the score, the higher the level of awareness about PrEP.
Time frame: baseline, 6 weeks, 12 weeks
Population: T
| Arm | Measure | Group | Value (MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| E-PrEP- Peer-Led Intervention About PrEP | PrEP Awareness | Baseline | 4.14 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 0.95 |
| E-PrEP- Peer-Led Intervention About PrEP | PrEP Awareness | 6 Weeks | 4.29 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 0.96 |
| E-PrEP- Peer-Led Intervention About PrEP | PrEP Awareness | 12 Weeks | 4.52 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 0.69 |
| BxNow- General Health Control Arm | PrEP Awareness | Baseline | 4.02 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 0.88 |
| BxNow- General Health Control Arm | PrEP Awareness | 6 Weeks | 4.13 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 0.91 |
| BxNow- General Health Control Arm | PrEP Awareness | 12 Weeks | 4.19 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 0.91 |
p-value: 0.2433Mixed Models Analysis
Comparison: At 12 weeks.p-value: 0.0839Mixed Models Analysis
Secondary
PrEP Barriers
Any Barriers to PrEP uptake. To measure barriers to PrEP uptake, 7 items were used. Each item was measured using a likert scale ( from 1-4; 1=Strongly Disagree, 4= Strongly Agree). The scores of each question were summed for each participant (scale scores ranged 1-28, with higher scores indicating higher levels of PrEP Barriers). The higher the score, the higher the number of PrEP Barriers.
Time frame: baseline, 6 weeks, 12 weeks
| Arm | Measure | Group | Value (MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| E-PrEP- Peer-Led Intervention About PrEP | PrEP Barriers | Baseline | 17.80 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 4.28 |
| E-PrEP- Peer-Led Intervention About PrEP | PrEP Barriers | 6 Weeks | 17.11 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 5.17 |
| E-PrEP- Peer-Led Intervention About PrEP | PrEP Barriers | 12 Weeks | 16.55 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 4.92 |
| BxNow- General Health Control Arm | PrEP Barriers | Baseline | 18.73 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 4.6 |
| BxNow- General Health Control Arm | PrEP Barriers | 6 Weeks | 18.76 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 5.22 |
| BxNow- General Health Control Arm | PrEP Barriers | 12 Weeks | 17.84 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 5.2 |
Comparison: At 6 weeks.p-value: 0.1021Mixed Models Analysis
Comparison: At 12 weeks.p-value: 0.133Mixed Models Analysis
Secondary
PrEP Stigma
Any stigma the participant might have about PrEP or those who use PrEP To measure PrEP Stigma we asked 3 questions, using a Likert scale (from 1-4; 1= Strongly Disagree, 4=Strongly Agree). The scores were summed for each participant. The scores range from 1-12, with higher scores indicating higher levels of PrEP Stigma. The higher the score, the higher the level of PrEP stigma.
Time frame: baseline, 6 weeks, 12 weeks
| Arm | Measure | Group | Value (MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| E-PrEP- Peer-Led Intervention About PrEP | PrEP Stigma | Baseline | 6.25 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 2.21 |
| E-PrEP- Peer-Led Intervention About PrEP | PrEP Stigma | 6 Weeks | 5.40 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 2.55 |
| E-PrEP- Peer-Led Intervention About PrEP | PrEP Stigma | 12 Weeks | 5.12 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 2.34 |
| BxNow- General Health Control Arm | PrEP Stigma | Baseline | 6.78 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 2.39 |
| BxNow- General Health Control Arm | PrEP Stigma | 6 Weeks | 6.24 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 2.87 |
| BxNow- General Health Control Arm | PrEP Stigma | 12 Weeks | 6.0 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 2.53 |
Comparison: At 6 weeks.p-value: 0.2114Mixed Models Analysis
Comparison: At 12 weeks.p-value: 0.2141Mixed Models Analysis
Secondary
Self-efficacy About Using PrEP
Self-reported answer to questions about self-efficacy of using PrEP. There were two questions to measure self-efficacy of PrEP using a Likert scale (ranging from 1-5; 1=Not at all, 5=Extremely). The scores from both questions were summed for each participant. The scale range from 1-10 with higher scores indicating higher the levels of PrEP self-efficacy.
Time frame: at baseline, 6 weeks, and 12 weeks
| Arm | Measure | Group | Value (MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| E-PrEP- Peer-Led Intervention About PrEP | Self-efficacy About Using PrEP | Baseline | 8.26 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 2.39 |
| E-PrEP- Peer-Led Intervention About PrEP | Self-efficacy About Using PrEP | 6 Weeks | 8.88 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 1.72 |
| E-PrEP- Peer-Led Intervention About PrEP | Self-efficacy About Using PrEP | 12 Weeks | 8.75 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 1.97 |
| BxNow- General Health Control Arm | Self-efficacy About Using PrEP | Baseline | 8.19 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 2.35 |
| BxNow- General Health Control Arm | Self-efficacy About Using PrEP | 6 Weeks | 8.49 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 1.86 |
| BxNow- General Health Control Arm | Self-efficacy About Using PrEP | 12 Weeks | 8.13 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 2.35 |
Comparison: At 6 weeks.p-value: 0.0818Mixed Models Analysis
Comparison: At 12 weeks.p-value: 0.0334Mixed Models Analysis
Other Pre-specified
Number of Participants With Self-reported HIV Testing
Self-reported HIV testing at baseline, 6 weeks, and 12 weeks.
Time frame: at baseline, 6 weeks, and 12 weeks
Population: Each row indicates when the participant who responded to the survey at baseline, 6 weeks, and 12 weeks.
| Arm | Measure | Group | Category | Value (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| E-PrEP- Peer-Led Intervention About PrEP | Number of Participants With Self-reported HIV Testing | Baseline | 1 month | 33 Participants |
| E-PrEP- Peer-Led Intervention About PrEP | Number of Participants With Self-reported HIV Testing | Baseline | 3 months or less | 29 Participants |
| E-PrEP- Peer-Led Intervention About PrEP | Number of Participants With Self-reported HIV Testing | Baseline | 4 to 6 months | 10 Participants |
| E-PrEP- Peer-Led Intervention About PrEP | Number of Participants With Self-reported HIV Testing | Baseline | 7 to 12 months | 6 Participants |
| E-PrEP- Peer-Led Intervention About PrEP | Number of Participants With Self-reported HIV Testing | Baseline | More than 12 months | 1 Participants |
| E-PrEP- Peer-Led Intervention About PrEP | Number of Participants With Self-reported HIV Testing | Baseline | I have never been tested for STI | 2 Participants |
| E-PrEP- Peer-Led Intervention About PrEP | Number of Participants With Self-reported HIV Testing | 6 Weeks | 1 month | 24 Participants |
| E-PrEP- Peer-Led Intervention About PrEP | Number of Participants With Self-reported HIV Testing | 6 Weeks | 3 months or less | 26 Participants |
| E-PrEP- Peer-Led Intervention About PrEP | Number of Participants With Self-reported HIV Testing | 6 Weeks | 4 to 6 months | 11 Participants |
| E-PrEP- Peer-Led Intervention About PrEP | Number of Participants With Self-reported HIV Testing | 6 Weeks | 7 to 12 months | 1 Participants |
| E-PrEP- Peer-Led Intervention About PrEP | Number of Participants With Self-reported HIV Testing | 6 Weeks | More than 12 months | 5 Participants |
| E-PrEP- Peer-Led Intervention About PrEP | Number of Participants With Self-reported HIV Testing | 6 Weeks | I have never been tested for STI | 2 Participants |
| E-PrEP- Peer-Led Intervention About PrEP | Number of Participants With Self-reported HIV Testing | 12 Weeks | 1 month | 26 Participants |
| E-PrEP- Peer-Led Intervention About PrEP | Number of Participants With Self-reported HIV Testing | 12 Weeks | 3 months or less | 31 Participants |
| E-PrEP- Peer-Led Intervention About PrEP | Number of Participants With Self-reported HIV Testing | 12 Weeks | 4 to 6 months | 9 Participants |
| E-PrEP- Peer-Led Intervention About PrEP | Number of Participants With Self-reported HIV Testing | 12 Weeks | 7 to 12 months | 0 Participants |
| E-PrEP- Peer-Led Intervention About PrEP | Number of Participants With Self-reported HIV Testing | 12 Weeks | More than 12 months | 4 Participants |
| E-PrEP- Peer-Led Intervention About PrEP | Number of Participants With Self-reported HIV Testing | 12 Weeks | I have never been tested for STI | 1 Participants |
| BxNow- General Health Control Arm | Number of Participants With Self-reported HIV Testing | 12 Weeks | 3 months or less | 19 Participants |
| BxNow- General Health Control Arm | Number of Participants With Self-reported HIV Testing | Baseline | 1 month | 22 Participants |
| BxNow- General Health Control Arm | Number of Participants With Self-reported HIV Testing | 6 Weeks | 7 to 12 months | 6 Participants |
| BxNow- General Health Control Arm | Number of Participants With Self-reported HIV Testing | Baseline | 3 months or less | 20 Participants |
| BxNow- General Health Control Arm | Number of Participants With Self-reported HIV Testing | 12 Weeks | I have never been tested for STI | 3 Participants |
| BxNow- General Health Control Arm | Number of Participants With Self-reported HIV Testing | Baseline | 4 to 6 months | 16 Participants |
| BxNow- General Health Control Arm | Number of Participants With Self-reported HIV Testing | 6 Weeks | More than 12 months | 3 Participants |
| BxNow- General Health Control Arm | Number of Participants With Self-reported HIV Testing | Baseline | 7 to 12 months | 7 Participants |
| BxNow- General Health Control Arm | Number of Participants With Self-reported HIV Testing | 12 Weeks | 4 to 6 months | 15 Participants |
| BxNow- General Health Control Arm | Number of Participants With Self-reported HIV Testing | Baseline | More than 12 months | 2 Participants |
| BxNow- General Health Control Arm | Number of Participants With Self-reported HIV Testing | 6 Weeks | I have never been tested for STI | 1 Participants |
| BxNow- General Health Control Arm | Number of Participants With Self-reported HIV Testing | Baseline | I have never been tested for STI | 4 Participants |
| BxNow- General Health Control Arm | Number of Participants With Self-reported HIV Testing | 12 Weeks | More than 12 months | 3 Participants |
| BxNow- General Health Control Arm | Number of Participants With Self-reported HIV Testing | 6 Weeks | 1 month | 20 Participants |
| BxNow- General Health Control Arm | Number of Participants With Self-reported HIV Testing | 12 Weeks | 1 month | 18 Participants |
| BxNow- General Health Control Arm | Number of Participants With Self-reported HIV Testing | 6 Weeks | 3 months or less | 23 Participants |
| BxNow- General Health Control Arm | Number of Participants With Self-reported HIV Testing | 12 Weeks | 7 to 12 months | 7 Participants |
| BxNow- General Health Control Arm | Number of Participants With Self-reported HIV Testing | 6 Weeks | 4 to 6 months | 13 Participants |
Other Pre-specified
Number of Participants With Self-reported Linkage-to-Care
Self-reported information about health care access (i.e. going to a medical appointment).
Time frame: at baseline, 6 weeks, and 12 weeks
Population: Each row has the number of participants who access healthcare at each time point in the yes category, and the number of people who did not access healthcare in the no category. (Baseline vs. 6 weeks vs. 12 weeks).
| Arm | Measure | Group | Category | Value (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| E-PrEP- Peer-Led Intervention About PrEP | Number of Participants With Self-reported Linkage-to-Care | Baseline- Visit in the past 12 months | Yes | 61 Participants |
| E-PrEP- Peer-Led Intervention About PrEP | Number of Participants With Self-reported Linkage-to-Care | Baseline- Visit in the past 12 months | No | 20 Participants |
| E-PrEP- Peer-Led Intervention About PrEP | Number of Participants With Self-reported Linkage-to-Care | 6 Weeks- Visit in the past 6 weeks | Yes | 40 Participants |
| E-PrEP- Peer-Led Intervention About PrEP | Number of Participants With Self-reported Linkage-to-Care | 6 Weeks- Visit in the past 6 weeks | No | 29 Participants |
| E-PrEP- Peer-Led Intervention About PrEP | Number of Participants With Self-reported Linkage-to-Care | 12 Weeks- Visit in the past 12 weeks | Yes | 45 Participants |
| E-PrEP- Peer-Led Intervention About PrEP | Number of Participants With Self-reported Linkage-to-Care | 12 Weeks- Visit in the past 12 weeks | No | 26 Participants |
| BxNow- General Health Control Arm | Number of Participants With Self-reported Linkage-to-Care | 12 Weeks- Visit in the past 12 weeks | Yes | 33 Participants |
| BxNow- General Health Control Arm | Number of Participants With Self-reported Linkage-to-Care | Baseline- Visit in the past 12 months | Yes | 64 Participants |
| BxNow- General Health Control Arm | Number of Participants With Self-reported Linkage-to-Care | 6 Weeks- Visit in the past 6 weeks | No | 25 Participants |
| BxNow- General Health Control Arm | Number of Participants With Self-reported Linkage-to-Care | Baseline- Visit in the past 12 months | No | 7 Participants |
| BxNow- General Health Control Arm | Number of Participants With Self-reported Linkage-to-Care | 12 Weeks- Visit in the past 12 weeks | No | 32 Participants |
| BxNow- General Health Control Arm | Number of Participants With Self-reported Linkage-to-Care | 6 Weeks- Visit in the past 6 weeks | Yes | 41 Participants |
Other Pre-specified
Trust in the Peer by Participant
The scale measure the level of trust the Participant had on the Peer's online post. Trust in the Peer Leader was measured using 4 questions, each scored from 1-7 (1=Strongly Disagree, 7=Strongly Agree). The score for the 4 questions was summed for each participant. The score ranged from 1-28 with higher scores indicating a higher level of trust the participant had in their Peer Leader.
Time frame: at baseline and 6 weeks
Population: The total number of participants who completed baseline study was 81 for e-prep and 71 for control. The analysis for 6 weeks included only the people who completed the survey at each that time period.
| Arm | Measure | Group | Value (MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| E-PrEP- Peer-Led Intervention About PrEP | Trust in the Peer by Participant | Baseline | 16.4 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 4.15 |
| E-PrEP- Peer-Led Intervention About PrEP | Trust in the Peer by Participant | 6 Weeks | 16.06 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 4.48 |
| BxNow- General Health Control Arm | Trust in the Peer by Participant | Baseline | 14.32 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 4.27 |
| BxNow- General Health Control Arm | Trust in the Peer by Participant | 6 Weeks | 15.71 score on a scale | Standard Deviation 4.28 |