CLUB DRUGS AND SEX ON DRUGS ARE ASSOCIATED WITH DIFFERENT MOTIVATION FOR CIRCUIT PARTY ATTENDANCE IN GAY MEN
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Club drug use has become an area of concern among gay men and men who have sex with men, where circuit parties may attract tens of thousands of patrons and where drug use and sex are not uncommon (1,2,3). Recent evidence suggests that a quarter of party attenders may have experienced a drug “overuse ” incident in the previous year and have had unprotected anal sex (3), with a significant association between drug use and unsafe sex. Similarly, Mattison et al. (2) found that use of Ecstasy (MDMA), Special K (ketamine), crystal methamphetamine, GHB (γ-hydroxybutyrate) and poppers (volatile nitrites) were associated with unsafe sex, and that greater numbers of drug taken were associated with higher risk. Mattison et al. (2) also found an association between reasons for attending circuit parties and unsafe sex in the past year. They reported that attending parties to be uninhibited and wild, to have sex, and to look and feel good were all associated with unsafe sex. We sought to further understand the dimensions of and relationships between reasons for attending circuit parties in gay men and drug use in the present study.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".