Patterns and risk factors of inconsistent condom use among men who have sex with men in Viet Nam: Results from an Internet-based cross-sectional survey
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Survey data from men who have sex with men (MSM) in Asian cities indicate drastic increases in HIV prevalence. It is unknown which factors are most important in driving these epidemics. The objective of this study was to identify patterns of condom use among MSM Internet users living in Viet Nam, as well as risk factors associated with inconsistent condom use and non-condom use. A national Internet-based survey of sexual behaviours was administered in 2011. Results showed that 44.9% of MSM reported not using a condom during their last anal sex encounter with a male partner. MSM were less likely to report condom use during anal sex with long-term partners than with casual partners. Twenty-three and a half per cent of MSM surveyed had ever taken an HIV test and received the results. Study findings highlight the urgent need for targeted strategies focused on increasing the rate of consistent condom use during anal sex with male partners among MSM in Viet Nam.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".