An Event-Level Analysis of Condom Use During Anal Intercourse Among Self-Reported Human Immunodeficiency Virus–Negative Gay and Bisexual Men in a Treatment as Prevention Environment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: We sought to identify factors associated with condom use during anal intercourse among self-identified human immunodeficiency virus-negative gay, bisexual, and other men who have sex with men (GBM) in Vancouver, Canada following "treatment as prevention" (TasP) scale-up in 2010. METHODS: Sexually active GBM were recruited using respondent-driven sampling from 2012 to 2014. We analyzed participants' most recent sexual encounter with up to their last 5 sexual partners within the past 6 months. In addition to individual- and event-level explanatory factors, we assessed potential associations with TasP awareness, TasP-related prevention practice (viral load sorting), and TasP-related attitudes (human immunodeficiency virus treatment optimism). Accounting for clustering at the respondent-driven sampling chain-level and participant-level, factors associated with event-level condom use versus nonuse were determined using a multivariable generalized linear mixed model built using backward selection and AIC minimization. RESULTS: Of 513 participants, 436 GBM (85%) reported a total of 1196 anal sex events with 56% condom use. The proportion of condom-protected sexual events decreased monthly over the study period (odds ratio [OR], 0.95 per month, 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.92-0.98). The TasP practices and attitudes were significantly associated with lower odds of condom use at the univariate level, but were no longer significant at multivariate level. In the multivariable model, event-level partner methamphetamine use (adjusted OR [aOR], 0.18; 95% CI, 0.06-0.58), frequency of recent anal intercourse with that partner (aOR, 0.97 per act; 95% CI, 0.95-0.98) and time since first sex with that partner (aOR, 0.97 per 6 months; 95% CI, 0.95-0.99) were associated with lower odds of condom use, whereas event-level participant alcohol use (aOR, 1.41; 95% CI, 1.01-1.98) and no planned future sex with that partner (aOR, 1.56; 95% CI, 1.08-2.27) were associated with greater odds of condom use. Event-level receptive-only (aOR, 2.10; 95% CI, 1.38-3.20) or insertive-only (aOR, 2.53; 95% CI, 1.64-3.90) sexual positions were associated with greater odds of condom use compared with reporting both positions. CONCLUSIONS: The TasP-related factors were not the most salient predictors of GBM's condom use. Health promotion must consider associations between condomless anal sex and substance use and relational factors.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 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".