Comparison of age-specific patterns of sexual behaviour and anal HPV prevalence in homosexual men with patterns in women
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Anal human papillomavirus (HPV) is highly prevalent in men who have sex with men (MSM) of all ages, whereas cervical HPV declines with age. We explore the hypothesis that different sexual behavioural patterns are the basis of this difference in age distribution. METHODS: Published data on age-specific HPV prevalence for women (cervical HPV) were extracted from a large meta-analysis and for MSM (anal HPV) from the EXPLORE study of HIV-negative MSM. Age-specific data on recent sexual activity were extracted from two behavioural surveys: the second Australian Study of Health and Relationships survey and the 2013 Gay Community Periodic Survey. RESULTS: At least 50% of MSM at all ages reported more than one sexual partner in the past 6 months. In comparison, 33% of women aged 16-19 years reported more than one partner over the past year. This decreased to 19% and 6% in women aged 20-29 and 30-39 years, respectively, and to fewer than 5% of women in older age groups. Prevalent anal HPV was detected in over 50% of MSM in each age group. Prevalence did not decline with age. In contrast, there was a steady decrease in cervical HPV prevalence with age. Cervical HPV prevalence fell from 23% among North American women aged <25 years to 3% in women aged ≥65 years. CONCLUSIONS: In contrast to the decreasing prevalence with age among heterosexual women, the high prevalence and lack of decline in prevalent anal HPV among older MSM are likely to be related to continuing high rates of newly acquired HPV infection from ongoing sexual exposure through new partners.
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 | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".