Men’s use of sexual health and HIV services in Swaziland: a mixed methods study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Over one-quarter of the adult population in Swaziland is estimated to be HIV positive. Men's use of sexual health (SH) services has significant implications for HIV prevention. This study aimed to understand Swazi men's health-seeking behaviours in relation to SH and HIV services. METHODS: A household survey was conducted in Manzini (n=503), complemented by 23 semi-structured interviews and two focus group discussions (with a total of 10 participants). RESULTS: One-third of male survey participants used SH services in the past year, most commonly HIV testing (28%). Service users were more likely to be sexually active (aOR 3.21, 95% CI: 1.81-5.68 for those with one partner; and aOR 2.35, 95% CI: 1.25-4.41 for those with multiple partners) compared with service non-users. Service users were less likely to prefer HIV services to be separated from other healthcare services (aOR 0.50, 95% CI: 0.35-0.71), or to agree with travelling further for their HIV test (aOR 0.52, 95% CI: 0.33-0.82) compared with non-users, after controlling for age-group and education. Men avoided SH services because they feared being stigmatised by STI/HIV testing, are uncomfortable disclosing SH problems to female healthcare providers, and avoided HIV testing by relying on their wife's results as a proxy for their own status. Informal providers, such as traditional healers, were often preferred because practitioners were more often male, physical exams were not required and appointments and payment options were flexible. CONCLUSION: To improve men's uptake of SH services, providers and services need to be more sensitive to men's privacy concerns, time restrictions and the potential stigma associated with STI/HIV testing.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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".