Skip to main content

Table 2 PrEP and HIV related knowledge, cognition, and behavior (N = 689)

From: Low willingness to pay for pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) among men who have sex with men (MSM) in China

ItemsN %
Mean ± SD
Willingness to pay for PrEP
 Amount willing to pay for PrEP per month (USD)
  09714.1
   < 14669.6
  14–2813920.2
  29–5711817.1
  58–848211.9
  85–113334.8
  114–141507.3
  142–282578.3
   ≥ 283476.8
 Percentage (of personal income) of willing to pay for PrEP
  09714.1
   < 5%19328.0
  6–10%11717.0
  11–25%15422.4
   > 25%12818.6
HIV-related characteristics
 Perceived risk of HIV infection (range: 1–5)2.36 ± 1.09
 Perceived risk of STI infection (range: 1–5)2.22 ± 1.10
 HIV literacy score a (range: 0–12)9.25 ± 1.98
 Sexual behaviors in the past month
  Inconsistent condom use (Yes)19928.9
  Engage in multiple sex partnership (Yes)21230.8
 HIV status communication with partners
HIV disclosure scale to sexual partnersb (range: 2–10)6.95 ± 2.69
PrEP-related cognition
 PrEP awareness
  Awareness of daily oral PrEP (Yes)22532.7
  Awareness of on-demand PrEP (Yes)20529.8
  Awareness of long injecting PrEP (Yes)436.2
PrEP awareness scalec(range: 0–3)0.69 ± 0.80
 PrEP acceptability
  Willingness to use daily oral PrEP (very likely/likely)42161.1
  Willingness to use on-demand PrEP (very likely/likely)54078.4
  Willingness to use LAI-PrEP (very likely/likely)43963.7
PrEP acceptability scaled(range: 3–15)11.44 ± 3.41
 Perceived PrEP adherence
  Perceived adherence to daily oral PrEP (very high/high)48770.7
  Perceived adherence to on-demand PrEP (very high/high)58084.2
  Perceived adherence to LAI-PrEP (very high/high)49071.1
Perceived PrEP adherence scalee(range: 3–15)12.27 ± 3.23
 Perceived PrEP benefit in reducing condom use (range: 1–5)2.38 ± 1.55
  1. STI sexually transmitted infection, PrEP Pre-exposure prophylaxis, LAI-PrEP Long-acting Injectable PrEP;
  2. aThe Cronbach’s alpha coefficient was 0.626, and 4 factors explained 53.1% of the total variance;
  3. bThe Cronbach’s alpha coefficient was 0.786, and 1 factor explained 82.4% of the total variance;
  4. cThe Cronbach’s alpha coefficient was 0.356, and 1 factor explained 45.2% of the total variance;
  5. dThe Cronbach’s alpha coefficient was 0.820, and 1 factor explained 73.9% of the total variance;
  6. eThe Cronbach’s alpha coefficient was 0.832, and 1 factor explained 75.2% of the total variance;