Assessment of Heterosexual-Identified Men Who Have Sex With Men and Men of Diverse Sexual Identities: Protocol for an International, Multilingual, Online, Comparative Sexuality Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Sexuality is multidimensional and complex, and involves identity development, attraction, and behavior. Heterosexual-identified men who have sex with men (H-MSM) experience sexual identity and behavior discordance, yet it is unknown how H-MSM compare to concordant heterosexual men and gay, bisexual, and queer (GBQ+) men in terms of sexuality constructs. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to survey adult cisgender men in Canada, the United States, and the United Kingdom to gain greater insights into how demographics, identity development, attraction, behavior, technology use, relationship negotiation and communication skills, and pre-exposure prophylaxis and life satisfaction relate to each other, and then to interview H-MSM for an in-depth follow-up on survey concepts. METHODS: Purposive sampling will be used to recruit men via online and offline venues. Data collection will be multifaceted and include an online questionnaire for adult cisgender men and a subsequent interview for H-MSM. The survey will be available in English, French, and Spanish. Structural equation modeling, underpinned by hegemonic masculinity and sexual script theories, will be performed to test the relationships among survey variables. Interpretive phenomenology will be employed on the qualitative data to consider how unique sociocultural factors influence the sexuality and experiences of H-MSM, allowing for similarities and differences across participants to be identified and explored. RESULTS: Data collection began on November 26, 2024, and as of February 2025, data collection remains ongoing. We expect to conclude data collection and data cleaning by mid-summer 2025. Data analysis will begin in fall 2025. Our findings will provide a more nuanced understanding of the identity development, attraction, behavior, relationship negotiation, and technology use of H-MSM in comparison with GBQ+ men and concordant heterosexual men. CONCLUSIONS: This research aims to broaden the scope of existing literature and support advancements in interventions and knowledge to support the overall health and well-being of H-MSM. An examination of potential differences among H-MSM, concordant heterosexual men, and GBQ+ men aims to improve the understanding of H-MSM as a distinct population, without dismissing them as closeted GBQ+ men. This study aims to provide key insights into avenues for research and practice with men whose sexuality and sexual behaviors may be outside of commonly accepted norms. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/66897.
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 | 0.024 | 0.015 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.034 | 0.008 |
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".