ABSTRACT
Objective To analyze the willingness and influencing factors for usage of pre-exposure prophylaxis(PrEP) among male students who have sex with men (MSM) in universities of Guangxi. Meth-ods 295 MSM students in universities were recruited by Snow-balling methods. Questionnaires were self-administered to collect social demographic information,AIDS related risky sexual behaviors and willingness for usage of PrEP. Logistic regression was employed for univariate and multivariate analysis. Results Of the 295 MSM,58(19.7%)had ever heard PrEP,265(89.8%) said that they would like to use PrEP. Multivari-ate logistic regression analysis showed that those who had found partners through friends ( OR=11.419,95%CI:1.363~95.641), those who would advise his friend to use PrEP ( OR=87.946,95%CI:13.660-566. 222),those who concerned the convenience to gain the medicine ( OR=119.652,95%CI:3.765-3802.184) and those who said that they could take medicine every day ( OR=88.245,95%CI:10.237-760.696) were more likely to accept PrEP. The subjects whose partners would be angry if they stick to use condoms( OR=0.106,95%CI:0.019-0.606),and those who suspected the effectiveness of drugs( OR=0.010,95%CI:0. 001-0.112) were less likely to accept PrEP. Conclusion The acceptability of PrEP is high in university students'MSM. The safety of drugs and the convenience to gain the medicine are the main influencing factors for usage of PrEP.Using of PrEP should be strengthened to the MSM.
ABSTRACT
<p><b>OBJECTIVE</b>To assess the methodological quality and reporting quality on Meta-analysis being published in the Chinese Journal of Gastrointestinal Surgery.</p><p><b>METHODS</b>Computerized literature searching was carried out in Wanfang Medical Online to collect articles that Meta-analysis was used in the Chinese Journal of Gastrointestinal Surgery since it was founded till July, 2014. Manual retrieval was also conducted. Two researchers independently screened for literature and extracted data. Qualities on methodologies or on the processes of reporting and reviewing were evaluated by both AMSTAR and PRISMA scales.</p><p><b>RESULTS</b>Forty-two papers on meta-analyses were included in this study. Results on the quality of methodology evaluation showed that the lowest and highest scores were 6 and 9 respectively, the median score was 7. Two articles (4.8%) were rated as high, 40 articles (95.2%) as moderate and 0 articles (0%) as low. Although the quality of methodology was above the average, however, there were still some problems seen in some papers as the conflict of interest was not stated, the list of studies (included and excluded) was not provided, a comprehensive literature search was not performed, the likelihood of publication bias was not assessed, etc. Results on the quality of reporting evaluation showed that the lowest and highest scores were 14 and 22 respectively, the average score was 18.43 ± 2.03, 3 articles (7.1%) scored less than 15 points, 35 articles (83.3%) scored 15.5-21 points, and 4 articles (9.6%) scored 21.5-27 points. The included reviews had high quality on the titles of the report, inclusion criteria, rationale of introduction, synthesis of results, results of individual. However, the abstract, objectives of introduction, scheme and registered, inclusion criteria, research screening, additional analysis, conclusion limitations, funding support etc. were lack of comprehensive reports.</p><p><b>CONCLUSIONS</b>Articles on Meta-analysis published in the Chinese Journal of Gastrointestinal Surgery are of high quality. The Chinese Journal of Gastrointestinal Surgery can provide better evidence for clinical decision to gastrointestinal surgeons. However, both of qualities on methodology and reports sill call for continuous improvement.</p>