Women’s willingness to experiment with condoms and lubricants: A study of women residing in a high HIV seroprevalence area
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The objective of this study was to investigate women's willingness to experiment with new condoms and lubricants, in order to inform condom promotion in a city with high rates of poverty and HIV. One hundred and seventy-three women (85.9% Black) sexually transmitted infection clinic attendees in Jackson, Mississippi, United States completed a questionnaire assessing willingness to experiment with condoms and lubricants and sexual pleasure and lubrication in relation to last condom use. Most women were willing to: (1) experiment with new types of condoms and lubricants to increase their sexual pleasure, (2) touch/handle these products in the absence of a partner, and (3) suggest experimenting with new condoms and lubricants to a sex partner. Previous positive sexual experiences with lubricant during condom use predicted willingness. The role women may play in male condom use should not be underestimated. Clinicians may benefit women by encouraging them to try new types of condoms and lubricants to find products consistent with sexual pleasure.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".