Global Human Immunodeficiency Virus Prevalence and Risk Behaviors in Transmasculine Individuals: A Scoping Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose: This scoping review sought to synthesize human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) and sexually transmitted infection (STI) prevalence, incidence, risk behaviors, and risk perceptions among transmasculine (TM) individuals globally. Methods: Eligible articles were peer-reviewed observational and interventional studies published in English between August 2, 2014 and November 2, 2021. Four electronic databases were systematically searched: PubMed, Embase, PsycInfo, and Sociological Abstracts and reference lists hand-searched. Results are presented using numerical summary and thematic analysis. Results: =39) spanned 12 countries and 2 multi-region studies. Laboratory-confirmed HIV prevalence ranged from 0% to 4% and self-reported HIV prevalence from 0% to 8%. Laboratory-confirmed STI diagnoses ranged from 1.2% to 7.7% for chlamydia, 0% to 10.5% for gonorrhea, 0% to 6% for syphilis, 1% to 8% for hepatitis C, and 0% to 8% for hepatitis B. Self-reported lifetime diagnosis of any STI ranged from 5.8% to 53.7%. No studies assessed HIV or STI incidence. Lifetime HIV testing prevalence varied from 23% to 89%. Lifetime STI testing prevalence ranged from 31.1% to 70.8%. Pre- and post-exposure prophylaxis use and knowledge were assessed in seven studies. Qualitative studies addressed HIV vulnerabilities and protective factors, including stigma and social, medical, and legal supports. Conclusion: Although TM individuals are vulnerable to HIV and STI, incidence data are lacking. There is a dearth of research on the experiences, risk factors, and sexual behaviors of TM individuals, especially those who are nonbinary or ethnoracially minoritized. The collection of gender identity data in routine HIV surveillance is recommended. Services and interventions developed by and for TM individuals are needed.
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 | 0.010 | 0.047 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.021 | 0.020 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".