Longitudinal Patterns of Sexual Behavior and Condom Use in a Cohort of HIV-Negative Gay and Bisexual Men in Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada, 1995–2000
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To characterize longitudinal patterns of sexual behavior in a cohort of young gay and bisexual men and determine their reasons for not using condoms. METHODS: Prospective data from a cohort of young gay and bisexual men aged 18 to 30 years were studied. Study participants had completed a baseline questionnaire and HIV test between May 1995 and April 1996 and four annual follow-up questionnaires. RESULTS: A total of 130 HIV-negative Vanguard participants met the eligibility criteria for this analysis. The median age at baseline was 26 years (range, 24-28). Most were white (79%), had completed high school (85%), were currently employed (82%), lived in stable housing (95%), and reported annual incomes of > or =$10,000 (82%). (All dollar amounts are given in Canadian dollars.) Consistently over the 5-year study period, > 70% of study subjects reported having > or =1 regular male sexual partners in the previous year. During each of the five successive 1-year periods, between 34% and 40% of respondents reported having had unprotected receptive anal intercourse with regular partners. Slightly fewer individuals (between 29%-39%) reported having had unprotected insertive anal intercourse with regular partners. Between 13% and 25% of participants reported having had insertive unprotected anal intercourse with casual sexual partners; and between 9% and 18% reported having had unprotected receptive anal intercourse with casual sexual partners. Reasons for engaging in unprotected anal intercourse varied depending on type of sexual partnership. CONCLUSION: High-risk sexual behaviors remained fairly consistent over a 5-year period in this study. This suggests that it is critically important to understand the motivations for unprotected sex when designing and implementing programs aimed at reducing HIV risk among young gay and bisexual men.
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 | 0.001 | 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".