Sexual health and the Rugby World Cup 2011: a cross-sectional study of sexual health clinics in New Zealand
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: We aimed to describe the characteristics of sexual health clinic (SHC) attendance and sexually transmissible infection (STI) diagnoses during the Rugby World Cup (RWC) in New Zealand in 2011. METHODS: SHC attendance and STI diagnoses around the time of the RWC were compared with the 5 preceding years. A cross-sectional survey conducted at SHCs in four New Zealand cities collected information from attendees having RWC-related sex. RESULTS: Although there was no statistically significant increase in clinic attendance or STI diagnoses during the RWC compared with previous years, in these four cities, 151 individuals of 2079 attending SHCs for a new concern reported RWC-related sex. The most frequently diagnosed STIs were chlamydial infection (Chlamydia trachomatis), genital warts and genital herpes. Most attendees (74%) who had RWC-related sex had consumed three or more alcoholic drinks; 22% had used a condom. Seven percent of women reported nonconsensual sex. RWC-related sex was associated with an increased risk of STI diagnoses in men: gonorrhoea (Neisseria gonorrhoeae): relative risk (RR)=4.9 (95% confidence interval (CI): 2.1-11.4); nonspecific urethritis: RR=2.8 (95% CI: 1.3-5.9); chlamydial infection: RR=1.8 (95% CI: 1.1-2.9). Using a condom was associated with a reduced risk (RR=0.3, 95% CI: 0.1-0.9) of diagnosis with any STI among those having RWC-related sex. CONCLUSIONS: These findings highlight issues that are amenable to prevention. The continued promotion of condoms as well as a reduction in the promotion and availability of alcohol at such events may reduce sexual health risks as well as other harm.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".