Earlier First Anal Sex Predicts Engagement in Chemsex Among Men Who Have Sex with Men in the United Kingdom
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Chemsex, a form of sexualized drug use, is prevalent among men who have sex with men (MSM) in the United Kingdom (UK), contributing to public health concerns like increased HIV transmission and overdose risk. This study explored the link between early first anal sex and chemsex engagement among MSM, a connection that has been underexplored in the UK. Analyzing data from 10,702 UK-based MSM from the European MSM Internet Survey (EMIS-2017), we used ordinal and binomial logistic regressions to assess how the age of first anal intercourse correlated with sexual risk behaviors and chemsex. The median age of anal sex debut was 17, with most participants (65%) reporting their first experience at 18 or older. A smaller group (7%) had their first anal intercourse at 13 or younger. Compared to those who had their first anal sex at 18 years or older, MSM who initiated anal sex at 17 years or younger were more likely to report having more non-steady condomless intercourse partners (aOR = 1.46, p < .001), using chemsex-associated drugs (aOR = 1.26, p = .013), engaging in non-sober sex (aOR = 1.22, p < .001), and recent involvement in chemsex (aOR = 1.48, p < .001). These findings highlight the need for interventions that address early sexual experiences to reduce sexual risk behaviors and chemsex 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 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".