MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2027865264 · doi:10.1080/09540120050001878

Correlates of high-risk sexual behaviour among Canadian men of South Asian and European origin who have sex with men

2000· article· en· W2027865264 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Ronald A. Ratti, Roger Bakeman, John L. Peterson

Bibliographic record

VenueAIDS Care · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHIV, Drug Use, Sexual Risk
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDemographyMen who have sex with menPsychologyClinical psychologyMedicineSociologyHuman immunodeficiency virus (HIV)Family medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A sample of 98 Canadian homosexual and bisexual men, 46 of South Asian and 52 of European origin, who had sex with other than an exclusive primary partner were asked about their high-risk sexual behaviours during the previous six months. They were also queried about internalized homophobia, acculturation to the gay community, and for South Asians acculturation to the majority culture. Participants who reported more internalized homophobia were more likely to engage in both high-risk anal and oral sex. South Asian men exhibited significantly greater levels of homophobia. In addition, South Asian men who were less acculturated to the majority culture were more likely to engage in both types of high-risk sex. These data suggest a need to address internalized homophobia in HIV prevention programmes with homosexual and bisexual men generally, and further suggest the need to target less acculturated South Asian men in particular.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.040
Threshold uncertainty score0.080

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.238 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations63
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAIDS CareSame topicHIV, Drug Use, Sexual RiskFrench-language works237,207