Risk Perception, Intended Sexual Behaviors, and Potential Associated Risks for Sexually Transmissible Infections Acquisition Among Australian Travelers: A Cross-Sectional Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Changes in travelers' sexual behaviors, driven by opportunities during travel, contribute to the acquisition of sexually transmissible infections (STIs). However, research on travelers' risk perception, intentions regarding new sexual partners, and engagement in behaviors that may place them at potential risk of STI acquisition remains limited. This study aims to assess the risk perception and intended sexual behaviors associated with STI acquisition among Australian travelers. METHODS: A cross-sectional online survey was conducted from July 2023 to August 2024 among Australian residents (aged ≥18 years) planning to travel overseas within 6 months. The survey was distributed in 5 Travel Medicine Alliance clinics and at the Gladstone Road Medical Centre clinic. Sociodemographics, travel plans, sexual intentions, STI risk perception, and patterns of intended sexual behaviors were collected. Subgroup analysis was performed on participants traveling without a partner to estimate their intention to engage in new sexual encounters. RESULTS: Of the 205 respondents, 172 (83.9%) attended the Travel Medicine Alliance clinics and 33 (16.1%) the Gladstone Road Medical Centre clinic. The median age was 42.5 years (interquartile range, 28-56 years); 51% (n = 105) were female. Nearly a quarter (22.7% [n = 29]) intended to engage in sexual activity with new partners while traveling. Among these, 72.4% perceived their risk of contracting STIs as low, despite reporting intended sexual behaviors linked to STI acquisition risk such as no intention to use condoms (28.0%), intention to engage in sexual relationships with sex workers (24.1%), and plans to undergo posttravel STI testing (34.6%). Nearly half (41.4%) identified a need for better STI-related pretravel information. CONCLUSIONS: A substantial proportion of surveyed travelers intended to engage in sexual activity with a new sexual partner while traveling, with many underestimating their STI risk and demonstrating intended sexual behaviors that increase their likelihood of STI acquisition. These findings underscore the need for comprehensive sexual health counseling during pretravel consultations, with a focus on STI risk awareness, preventive strategies, and posttravel STI screening.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".