Do sexual expectancies and inhibitions predict high-risk sexual behaviours? Evidence from a cross-sectional survey among young psychoactive substance users in informal settlements in Kampala, Uganda
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Psychoactive substance use is a public health challenge among young people in informal settlements. Though rarely examined, psychoactive substance use is linked to sexual expectancies and inhibitions, and consequently high-risk sexual behaviours. This study examined the association between sexual expectancies and inhibitions, and high-risk sexual behaviours among young psychoactive substance users (PSUs) in informal settlements in Kampala, Uganda. METHODS: This cross-sectional study recruited 744 young PSUs from informal settlements in Kampala. Respondent driven sampling was used to recruit respondents. A 'modified' Poisson regression model was used for inferential statistics. Data were analysed using the Stata 14 software. RESULTS: Of the 744 study participants, 45.6% believed that psychoactive substance use improves sexual performance; 43.3% believed that psychoactive substances make sex more pleasurable, and 53.3% believed that psychoactive substances give courage or confidence to approach a partner for sex. The belief that psychoactive substance use improves sexual performance (PR 1.14, 95% CI: 1.01-1.30), increases the likelihood of engaging in sex (PR 1.20, 95% CI: 1.04-1.40) or gives courage or confidence to approach a sexual partner (PR 1.21, 95% CI: 1.05-1.39) were associated with having sex while under the influence of psychoactive substances. The belief that a psychoactive substance user under the influence of psychoactive substances is more likely to engage in sex (PR 1.48, 95% CI: 1.15-1.90), and likely to find it difficult to refuse sex (PR 1.28, 95% CI: 1.06-1.55) were positively associated with engaging in multiple sexual partnerships. The belief that one easily forgets to use a condom when under the influence of psychoactive substances was positively associated with inconsistent condom use (PR 1.26, 95% CI: 1.09-1.45). CONCLUSION: Psychoactive substance use expectancies associated with high-risk sexual behaviours included the belief that psychoactive substances improve sexual performance and improve confidence in approaching a sexual partner. Psychoactive substance use inhibitions associated with high-risk sexual behaviours included an increased likelihood of engaging in sexual intercourse, difficulties in refusing to engage in sexual intercourse, and forgetting to use condoms while intoxicated. Interventions targeting a reduction in high-risk sexual behaviour should integrate the impact of psychoactive substance use on sexual behaviour.
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 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".