Integrated Cognitive-Behavioral Therapy for Social Anxiety and HIV/STI Prevention for Gay and Bisexual Men: A Pilot Intervention Trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Given the alarmingly high HIV and sexually transmitted infection (STI) incidence among gay and bisexual men (GBM) worldwide, there is a critical need for HIV prevention interventions specifically for GBM. Social anxiety, or anxiety about being evaluated in interpersonal situations, is a risk factor for condomless anal sex (CAS) among GBM (e.g., Hart & Heimberg, 2005; Hart, James, Purcell, & Farber, 2008). Social anxiety may also increase substance use in sexual situations, which is another risk factor for HIV/STIs in this risk group (Semple, Strathdee, Zians, McQuaid, & Patterson, 2011). The goal of the Sexual Confidence Study was to provide initial evidence of efficacy for a 10-session integrated cognitive-behavioral therapy for social anxiety, substance use management in sexual situations, and HIV sexual risk reduction for HIV-negative GBM. Diagnostic and self-report assessments were completed at baseline, posttreatment, 3-month follow-up, and 6-month follow-up. In this open trial design, we observed a 50% reduction in engagement in HIV/STI sexual risk behavior at 6-month follow-up. We also observed large uncontrolled treatment effect sizes for reductions in social anxiety disorder and problematic alcohol use. These preliminary findings suggest that the present treatment may offer an efficient way of concurrently reducing social anxiety, problematic alcohol use, and the risk of contracting HIV and STIs via CAS with serodiscordant partners among HIV-negative GBM. • This study tested a novel 10-session cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT). • This treatment integrates CBT for social anxiety with sexual risk reduction. • There was a 50% reduction in sexual risk behavior at follow-up. • We observed reductions in social anxiety disorder. • We observed reductions in problematic alcohol use.
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) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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".