Table 2. Logistic regression models among PrEP-experienced MSM, 20 European countries, October 2023–April 2024 (n = 7,505).

Covariate		aOR	95% CI	p value
Model 1: Latent SEP backgrounds and the likelihood of accessing non-governmental PrEP provision pathways
Latent socioeconomic position background	Class 1a	Reference
	Class 2b	1.27	1.04–1.55	0.018
	Class 3c	1.28	0.96–1.68	0.079
Oral PrEP reimbursement status	Fully reimbursed	Reference
	Partially reimbursed	0.31	0.26–0.37	< 0.001
	Not reimbursed	0.69	0.56–0.85	0.001
Model 2: PrEP provision pathways and the likelihood of suboptimal oral PrEP adherence
PrEP provision pathway	Governmental	Reference
	Non-governmental	1.28	1.03–1.58	0.022
Latent socioeconomic position background	Class 1a	Reference
	Class 2b	1.34	1.12–1.59	0.001
	Class 3c	0.60	0.45–0.78	< 0.001
Oral PrEP reimbursement status	Fully reimbursed	Reference
	Partially reimbursed	0.95	0.83–1.08	0.442
	Not reimbursed	0.91	0.74–1.10	0.326
Model 3: PrEP provision pathways and the likelihood of discontinuing oral PrEP
PrEP provision pathway	Governmental	Reference
	Non-governmental	3.55	2.99–4.21	< 0.001
Latent socioeconomic position background	Class 1a	Reference
	Class 2b	1.90	1.60–2.25	< 0.001
	Class 3c	0.83	0.60–1.11	0.219
Oral PrEP reimbursement status	Fully reimbursed	Reference
	Partially reimbursed	0.95	0.81–1.11	0.515
	Not reimbursed	1.62	1.34–1.95	< 0.001
Model 4: PrEP provision pathways and the likelihood of having a high LA-PrEP intention
PrEP provision pathway	Governmental	Reference
	Non-governmental	1.28	1.06–1.56	0.011
Latent socioeconomic position background	Class 1a	Reference
	Class 2b	1.04	0.89–1.22	0.663
	Class 3c	0.81	0.66–1.00	0.050
Oral PrEP reimbursement status	Fully reimbursed	Reference
	Partially reimbursed	0.42	0.37–0.47	< 0.001
	Not reimbursed	0.79	0.66–0.95	0.009

aOR: adjusted odds ratio; CI: confident intervals; MSM: men who have sex with men; PrEP: pre-exposure prophylaxis; SEP: socioeconomic position.

^a Working-age MSM with more advantaged socioeconomic positions.

^b Younger MSM with less advantaged socioeconomic positions.

^c Older MSM with more advantaged socioeconomic positions.

Model 1: The variance inflation factors for these variables ranged from 1.002 to 1.003, suggesting negligible multi-collinearity. Model 2: The variance inflation factors for these variables ranged from 1.001 to 1.025, suggesting negligible multi-collinearity. Model 3: The variance inflation factors for these variables ranged from 1.003 to 1.041, suggesting negligible multi-collinearity. Model 4: The variance inflation factors for these variables ranged from 1.003 to 1.023, suggesting negligible multi-collinearity.