Informing theoretical development of salutogenic, asset-based health improvement to reduce syndemics among gay, bisexual and other men who have sex with men: Empirical evidence from secondary analysis of multi-national, online cross-sectional surveys
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Globally, gay, bisexual and other men who have sex with men (GBMSM) experience an increased burden of poor sexual, mental and physical health. Syndemics theory provides a framework to understand comorbidities and health among marginalised populations. Syndemics theory attempts to account for the social, environmental, and other structural contexts that are driving and/or sustaining simultaneous multiple negative health outcomes, but has been widely critiqued. In this paper, we conceptualise a new framework to counter syndemics by assessing the key theoretical mechanisms by which pathogenic social context variables relate to ill-health. Subsequently, we examine how salutogenic, assets-based approaches to health improvement could function among GBMSM across diverse national contexts. Comparative quantitative secondary analysis of data on syndemics and community assets are presented from two international, online, cross-sectional surveys of GBMSM (SMMASH2 in Scotland, Wales, Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland and Sex Now in Canada). Negative sexual, mental and physical health outcomes were clustered as hypothesised, providing evidence of the syndemic. We found that syndemic ill-health was associated with social isolation and the experience of stigma and discrimination, but this varied across national contexts. Moreover, while some of our measures of community assets appeared to have a protective effect on syndemic ill-health, others did not. These results present an important step forward in our understanding of syndemic ill-health and provide new insights into how to intervene to reduce it. They point to a theoretical mechanism through which salutogenic approaches to health improvement could function and provide new strategies for working with communities to understand the proposed processes of change that are required. To move forward, we suggest conceptualising syndemics within a complex adaptive systems model, which enables consideration of the development, sustainment and resilience to syndemics both within individuals and at the population-level.
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 | 0.006 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".