Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To compare HIV risk factors of male street youth involved in survival sex with those of their never involved peers and to describe the sexual activities of the involved youths. METHODS: From 2001 to 2003, street youth aged 14-23 years were recruited from street youth agencies in Montreal, Canada. Information was collected on sociodemographic characteristics, substance use, and sexual behaviours. Involvement in survival sex was defined as having ever exchanged sex for money, gifts, drugs, shelter, or other needs. Logistic regression was used to identify HIV risk factors associated with involvement in survival sex. RESULTS: Among the 542 male participants recruited, 27.7% reported involvement in survival sex. HIV risk factors independently associated with such involvement were injection drug using partners (modulated by length of homelessness), unprotected oral sex with male partners, steroid injection, history of sexual abuse, and drug injection. Among involved youths, 32.0% had only female clients, 41.3% only male clients, and 26.7% had clients of both sexes. Unprotected sexual activities were common with clients. However, even more risks were taken with non-commercial sexual partners. CONCLUSIONS: Male street youth involved in survival sex are at higher risk for HIV than their non-involved peers not only because of their unprotected commercial sexual activities. They have multiple other HIV risks related to non-commercial sexual activities, drug injection, and sexual abuse. All these risks need to be addressed when providing sexual health interventions for this population.
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 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".