Depression and Sexual Dysfunction Among HIV-Positive and HIV Negative Men Who Have Sex With Men: Mediation by Use of Antidepressants and Recreational Stimulants
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Erectile dysfunction (ED) and other forms of sexual dysfunction are highly prevalent among HIV+ men who have sex with men (MSM). Research has not previously identified the mechanisms by which depression may be associated with sexual dysfunction among HIV-positive and HIV-seronegative (HIV-negative) MSM. The present study examined the role of antidepressant use, stimulant use, and smoking as mediators of the relation between depression and sexual dysfunction among HIV-positive and HIV-negative MSM. Participants enrolled in the Multicenter AIDS Cohort Study (MACS), an ongoing prospective study of the natural and treated histories of HIV infection among MSM in the United States, completed a modified version of the International Index of Erectile Function for MSM. The study sample included 1,363 participants, with 619 HIV-positive men and 744 HIV-negative men. A structural equation model examined depression as a predictor of subsequent sexual dysfunction, mediated by antidepressant use, stimulant use, and smoking. Depression predicted subsequent sexual function among both HIV-negative and HIV-positive MSM. This effect appeared to be both a direct effect and an indirect effect via antidepressant use. Findings suggest that antidepressant medication use may partially explain sexual dysfunction among MSM.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".