Estimation of the Population Size of Men Who Have Sex With Men in Vietnam: Social App Multiplier Method
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Although the prevalence of HIV among men who have sex with men (MSM) in Vietnam has been increasing in recent years, there are no estimates of the population size of MSM based on tested empirical methods. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to estimate the size of the MSM population in 12 provinces in Vietnam and extrapolate from those areas to generate a national population estimate of MSM. A secondary aim of this study was to compare the feasibility of obtaining the number of users of a mobile social (chat and dating) app for MSM using 3 different approaches. METHODS: This study used the social app multiplier method to estimate the size of MSM populations in 12 provinces using the count of users on a social app popular with MSM in Vietnam as the first data source and a questionnaire propagated through the MSM community using respondent-driven sampling as the second data source. A national estimation of the MSM population is extrapolated from the results in the study provinces, and the percentage of MSM reachable through online social networks is clarified. RESULTS: The highest MSM population size among the 12 provinces is estimated in Hanoi and the lowest is estimated in Binh Dinh. On average, 37% of MSM in the provinces surveyed had used the social app Jack'd in the last 30 days (95% CI 27-48). Extrapolation of the results from the study provinces with reliable estimations results in an estimated national population of 178,000 MSM (95% CI 122,000-512,000) aged 15 to 49 years in Vietnam. The percentage of MSM among adult males aged 15 to 49 years in Vietnam is 0.68% (95% CI 0.46-1.95). CONCLUSIONS: This study is the first attempt to empirically estimate the population of MSM in Vietnam and highlights the feasibility of reaching a large proportion of MSM through a social app. The estimation reported in this study is within the bounds suggested by the Joint United Nations Programme on HIV/AIDS. This study provides valuable information on MSM population sizes in provinces where reliable estimates were obtained, which they can begin to work with in program planning and resource allocation.
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 | 0.004 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".