Nitrite inhalant use among young gay and bisexual men in Vancouver during a period of increasing HIV incidence
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Nitrite inhalants ("poppers") are peripheral vasodilators which, since the beginning of the epidemic, have been known to increase risk for acquiring HIV infection among men who have sex with men (MSM). However, few studies in recent years have characterized use. From 1999 to 2004, new HIV diagnoses among MSM in British Columbia increased 78%, prompting us to examine the prevalence and correlates of this modifiable HIV risk factor. METHODS: Self-administered questionnaires were completed between October 2002 and May 2004 as part of an open cohort study of HIV-seronegative young MSM. We measured nitrite inhalant use during the previous year and use during sexual encounters with casual partners specifically. Correlates of use were identified using odds ratios. RESULTS: Among 354 MSM surveyed, 31.6% reported any use during the previous year. Nitrite inhalant use during sexual encounters was reported by 22.9% of men and was strongly associated with having casual partners, with greater numbers of casual partners (including those with positive or unknown serostatus) and with anal intercourse with casual partners. Nitrite inhalant use was not associated with non-use of condoms with casual sexual partners per se. CONCLUSION: Contemporary use of nitrite inhalants amongst young MSM is common and a strong indicator of anal intercourse with casual sexual partners. Since use appears to increase the probability of infection following exposure to HIV, efforts to reduce the use of nitrite inhalants among MSM should be a very high priority among HIV prevention strategies.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".