Coital frequency and condom use in monogamous and concurrent sexual relationships in Cape Town, South Africa
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: A decreased frequency of unprotected sex during episodes of concurrent relationships may dramatically reduce the role of concurrency in accelerating the spread of HIV. Such a decrease could be the result of coital dilution - the reduction in per-partner coital frequency from additional partners - and/or increased condom use during concurrency. To study the effect of concurrency on the frequency of unprotected sex, we examined sexual behaviour data from three communities with high HIV prevalence around Cape Town, South Africa. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional survey from June 2011 to February 2012 using audio computer-assisted self-interviewing to reconstruct one-year sexual histories, with a focus on coital frequency and condom use. Participants were randomly sampled from a previous TB and HIV prevalence survey. Mixed effects logistic and Poisson regression models were fitted to data from 527 sexually active adults reporting on 1210 relationship episodes to evaluate the effect of concurrency status on consistent condom use and coital frequency. RESULTS: The median of the per-partner weekly average coital frequency was 2 (IQR: 1-3), and consistent condom use was reported for 36% of the relationship episodes. Neither per-partner coital frequency nor consistent condom use changed significantly during episodes of concurrency (aIRR=1.05; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.99-1.24 and aOR=1.01; 95% CI: 0.38-2.68, respectively). Being male, coloured, having a tertiary education, and having a relationship between 2 weeks and 9 months were associated with higher coital frequencies. Being coloured, and having a relationship lasting for more than 9 months, was associated with inconsistent condom use. CONCLUSIONS: We found no evidence for coital dilution or for increased condom use during concurrent relationship episodes in three communities around Cape Town with high HIV prevalence. Given the low levels of self-reported consistent condom use, our findings suggest that if the frequency of unprotected sex with each of the sexual partners is sustained during concurrent relationships, HIV-positive individuals with concurrent partners may disproportionately contribute to onward HIV transmission.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".