MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2003864666 · doi:10.1111/aji.12064

Heterosexual Anal Intercourse: A Neglected Risk Factor for <scp>HIV</scp>?

2012· review· en· W2003864666 on OpenAlex
Rebecca F. Baggaley, Dobromir Dimitrov, Branwen Nia Owen, Michael Pickles, Ailsa R. Butler, Benoı̂t Mâsse, Marie‐Claude Boily

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Reproductive Immunology · 2012
Typereview
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicAdolescent Sexual and Reproductive Health
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalCentre Hospitalier Universitaire Sainte-Justine
FundersEunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human DevelopmentNational Institute of Allergy and Infectious DiseasesWellcome Trust
KeywordsAnal intercourseSexual intercourseHuman immunodeficiency virus (HIV)Transmission (telecommunications)Sexual behaviorPsychologyHeterosexualityMedicineDevelopmental psychologyDemographyHomosexualityImmunologyEnvironmental healthMen who have sex with menPopulationSociologyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Heterosexual anal intercourse confers a much greater risk of HIV transmission than vaginal intercourse, yet its contribution to heterosexual HIV epidemics has been under-researched. In this article we review the current state of knowledge of heterosexual anal intercourse practice worldwide and identify the information required to assess its role in HIV transmission within heterosexual populations, including input measures required to inform mathematical models. We then discuss the evidence relating anal intercourse and HIV with sexual violence.

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.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.984
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0060.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.006
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 head0.137
GPT teacher head0.468
Teacher spread0.331 · 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