MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2003679374 · doi:10.1080/17441692.2014.948481

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

2014· article· en· W2003679374 on OpenAlexaff
Macarena C. García, Quyen Le Duong, Licelot C. Eralte Mercer, Samantha B. Meyer, Todd Koppenhaver, Paul Ward

Bibliographic record

VenueGlobal Public Health · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHIV/AIDS Research and Interventions
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersFlinders University
KeywordsCondomCasualDemographyMen who have sex with menMedicineCross-sectional studyEnvironmental healthHuman immunodeficiency virus (HIV)Family medicineSyphilisPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.331
Threshold uncertainty score0.880

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.060
GPT teacher head0.365
Teacher spread0.305 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations12
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGlobal Public HealthSame topicHIV/AIDS Research and InterventionsFrench-language works237,207