Intimate Partner Violence and HIV Prevention Among Sexual Minority Men: Protocol for a Prospective Mixed Methods Cohort Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Sexual minority men experience intimate partner violence (IPV) at rates similar to those reported by heterosexual women in the United States. Previous studies linked both IPV victimization and perpetration to HIV risk and seroconversion; however, less is known about the impact of IPV on HIV testing, sexually transmitted infection (STI) testing, pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) uptake, and the persistence of PrEP use among sexual minority men experiencing IPV. Although prior work suggests that IPV may influence HIV prevention behavior, experiences of IPV are so highly varied among sexual minority men (eg, forms, frequency, and severity; steady vs casual partnerships; perpetration vs receipt; and sexual vs physical vs psychological violence) that additional research is needed to better understand the impact that IPV has on HIV risk and protective behaviors to develop more effective interventions for sexual minority men. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to contribute to our understanding of the antecedents of IPV and the direct and indirect pathways between perpetration and receipt of IPV and HIV or STI risk behavior, STIs, and use of PrEP among sexual minority men experiencing IPV. METHODS: This mixed methods study has 2 phases: phase 1 involved formative qualitative interviews with 23 sexual minority men experiencing IPV and 10 key stakeholders or providers of services to sexual minority men experiencing IPV to inform the content of a subsequent web-based cohort study, and phase 2 involves the recruitment of a web-based cohort study of 500 currently partnered HIV-negative sexual minority men who reside in Centers for Disease Control and Prevention-identified Ending the HIV Epidemic priority jurisdictions across the United States. Participants will be followed for 24 months. They will be assessed through a full survey and asked to self-collect and return biospecimen kits assessing HIV, STIs, and PrEP use at 0, 6, 12, 18, and 24 months. They will also be asked to complete abbreviated surveys to assess for self-reported changes in key study variables at 3, 9, 15, and 21 months. RESULTS: Phase 1 was launched in May 2021, and the phase 1 qualitative interviews began in December 2021 and were concluded in March 2022 after a diversity of experiences and perceptions were gathered and no new ideas emerged in the interviews. Rapid analysis of the qualitative interviews took place between March 2022 and June 2022. Phase 2 recruitment of the full cohort began in August 2022 and is planned to continue through February 2024. CONCLUSIONS: This mixed methods study will contribute valuable insights into the association that IPV has with HIV risk and protective behaviors among sexual minority men. The findings from this study will be used to inform the development or adaptation of HIV and IPV prevention interventions for sexual minority men experiencing IPV. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/41453.
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 | 0.048 | 0.030 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.095 | 0.017 |
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".