Traumatic Revictimization of Men Who Have Sex With Men Living With HIV/AIDS
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abuse in childhood has been established as a predictor of adult abuse, with the strongest associations found between childhood sexual abuse (CSA) and adult sexual victimization. Revictimization has been demonstrated among women, and there is a growing literature on revictimization experiences among men who have sex with men (MSM). No studies have assessed revictimization among MSM living with HIV, despite strong evidence for disproportionately high rates of life span abuse among this group, along with the added vulnerability of living with HIV and sexual minority stress. In this study, we contribute to the literature by exploring associations between multiple types of childhood and adult abuse experiences (physical, sexual, and psychological; perpetrated by partners and non-partner), rather than examining sexual victimization alone. A sample of 166 HIV-positive MSM attending primary HIV health care clinics in Seattle, Washington, completed a one-time questionnaire. Results of regression analyses revealed associations between experiencing CSA and adult sexual abuse, and experiencing childhood physical abuse and adult physical and sexual abuse. Childhood psychological abuse was associated with adult physical and psychological abuse and partner psychological abuse. At higher frequencies, childhood psychological abuse was associated with all forms of adult abuse. These findings suggest that various forms of childhood abuse experiences confer broad vulnerability to adult abuse experiences and point to potentially different pathways to revictimization based on childhood abuse type.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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".