Enhancing help-seeking behaviour among men who have sex with men at risk for sexually transmitted infections: the syn.bas.in randomised controlled trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Men who have sex with men (MSM) are at increased risk for STIs and mental disorders. Syndemic theory holds that psychosocial issues co-occur and interact, and thus increase sexual risk behaviour. Psychosocial issue identification, referral and management might reduce risk behaviour. METHODS: In the syndemic-based intervention study, an open-label randomised controlled trial, MSM were enrolled at the STI outpatient clinic of the Public Health Service of Amsterdam. We screened participants using validated questionnaires on the following problem domains: alcohol and substance use, sexual compulsivity, anxiety, depression, attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, alexithymia, intimate partner violence and childhood sexual abuse. Individuals were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive either tailored, face-to-face feedback and help-seeking advice on mental health screening, or no feedback and no help-seeking advice. Participants were followed trimonthly for a year. The primary outcomes were self-reported and confirmed help-seeking behaviour. RESULTS: We included 155 MSM: 76 in the intervention group and 79 in the control group. At inclusion, 128 participants (83.1%) scored positive in at least one problem domain. We found no significant differences in self-reported or confirmed help-seeking behaviour between the intervention and the control group: 41% vs 29% (p=0.14) and 28% vs 22% (p=0.44), respectively. There were also no differences in STI incidence and condomless anal sex acts between the two groups. CONCLUSION: Screening showed high prevalence of problems related to mental health and substance use, while tailored feedback, advice and referral did not significantly increase help-seeking behaviour. Other interventions are needed to tackle the high burden of mental disorders among MSM. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT02859935.
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) | 0.005 | 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 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.016 | 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".