MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4398145528 · doi:10.2196/46845

Understanding Risk Factors for Oropharyngeal Gonorrhea Among Sex Workers Attending Sexual Health Clinics in 2 Australian Cities: Mixed Methods Study

2024· article· en· W4398145528 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Tiffany R. Phillips, Christopher K. Fairley, Kate Maddaford, Anna McNulty, Basil Donovan, Rebecca Guy, Ruthy McIver, Rebecca Wigan, Rick Varma, Jason J. Ong, Denton Callander, Gabrielle Skelsey, Mish Pony, Dylan O'Hara, Jade Bilardi, Eric P. F. Chow

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Public Health and Surveillance · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSex work and related issues
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGonorrheaMedicineReproductive healthSexual behaviorFamily medicineEnvironmental healthPublic healthDemographyGynecologyPopulationHuman immunodeficiency virus (HIV)Clinical psychologyNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The risk factors for oropharyngeal gonorrhea have not been examined in sex workers despite the increasing prevalence of gonorrhea infection. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to determine the risk factors for oropharyngeal gonorrhea in female and gender-diverse sex workers (including cisgender and transgender women, nonbinary and gender fluid sex workers, and those with a different identity) and examine kissing, oral sex, and mouthwash practices with clients. METHODS: This mixed methods case-control study was conducted from 2018 to 2020 at 2 sexual health clinics in Melbourne, Victoria, and Sydney, New South Wales, Australia. We recruited 83 sex workers diagnosed with oropharyngeal gonorrhea (cases) and 581 sex workers without (controls). Semistructured interviews with 19 sex workers from Melbourne were conducted. RESULTS: In the case-control study, the median age of 664 sex workers was 30 (IQR 25-36) years. Almost 30% of sex workers (192/664, 28.9%) reported performing condomless fellatio on clients. Performing condomless fellatio with clients was the only behavior associated with oropharyngeal gonorrhea (adjusted odds ratio 3.6, 95% CI 1.7-7.6; P=.001). Most participants (521/664, 78.5%) used mouthwash frequently. In the qualitative study, almost all sex workers reported kissing clients due to demand and generally reported following clients' lead with regard to kissing style and duration. However, they used condoms for fellatio because they considered it a risky practice for contracting sexually transmitted infections, unlike cunnilingus without a dental dam. CONCLUSIONS: Our study shows that condomless fellatio is a risk factor for oropharyngeal gonorrhea among sex workers despite most sex workers using condoms with their clients for fellatio. Novel interventions, particularly targeting the oropharynx, will be required for oropharyngeal gonorrhea prevention.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.052
Threshold uncertainty score0.104

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.168
GPT teacher head0.452
Teacher spread0.285 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Public Health and Surveillance→Same topicSex work and related issues→French-language works237,207→