1587Prescription erectile dysfunction medication, sexual risk behaviors, and sexually transmitted infections among HIV positive men
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background. Use of erectile dysfunction (ED) medication, particularly recreational use, has been associated with sexual risk behaviors and sexually transmitted infections (STIs). Data on prescription ED medication use, sexual risk behaviors and STI screening among HIV+ men are lacking. Methods. A cross-sectional study at a university-based HIV clinic evaluated prevalence and correlates of ED medication prescription among established male HIV+ patients in 2011-12. Patients were included if ≥19 years old, in care for >1 year, with at least 2 visits ≥90 days apart within the last year. Multivariable (MV) log-binomial regression models were used to evaluate associations (prevalence ratio, PR with 95% confidence interval, CI) of patient characteristics with ED medication prescription. Results. Of 1,170 HIV+ men, 269 (23%) were prescribed ED medication (mean age 50, 27% heterosexual and 73% MSM, 41% African American). Similar prevalence of ED medication prescription was observed for MSM (22%) and heterosexual men (26%). Among men on ED medications who took a survey regarding current sexual risk behavior, 181/234 (77%) reported multiple partners, 57/144 (40%) sex without condom use and 73/230 (32%) sex after alcohol/drug use. In MV analysis, age ≥ 50 years (PR = 1.5; 95% Cl 1.2-1.8), multiple sexual partners (1.9; 1.4-2.5), sex after alcohol/drugs (1.3; 1.0-1.7), and prior history of STI (1.4; 1.1-1.7) were significantly associated with ED medication prescription, while sexual orientation, race, insurance, substance use, and viral load were not. Annual protocol-driven syphilis testing was done in 253/269 (94%) of men on ED medication, with 9 (4%) positive for new infection. In contrast providers performed less annual testing for Neisseria gonorrhoeae (GC) and Chlamydia trachomatis (CT): 83/269 (31%), of whom 3 were GC positive and 1 CT positive. Among MSM on ED medication (n = 196), GC/CT testing was done in 55 (28%), of whom 54 received urogenital testing and 14 rectal testing. Conclusion. In this cross-sectional study, ED medication prescription was significantly associated with sexual risk behavior in HIV+ men. Incidence of syphilis among men on ED medications was high. Screening for GC and CT needs to be increased, particularly rectal screening among MSM. Disclosures. All authors: No reported disclosures.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 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 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".