ArticleJournal of sex research2017
Heterosexual Anal Sex Among Men and Women in Substance Abuse Treatment: Secondary Analysis of Two Gender-Specific HIV-Prevention Trials.
Article in Journal of sex research, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Receptive anal sex has high human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) transmission risk, and heterosexual substance-abusing individuals report higher anal sex rates compared to their counterparts in the general population. This secondary analysis evaluated the effectiveness of two gender-specific, evidence-based HIV-prevention interventions (Real Men Are Safe, or REMAS, for men; Safer Sex Skill Building, or SSSB, for women) against an HIV education (HIV-Ed) control condition on decreasing unprotected heterosexual anal sex (HAS) among substance abuse treatment-seeking men (n = 171) and women (n = 105). Two variables, engagement in any HAS and engagement in unprotected HAS, were assessed at baseline and three months postintervention. Compared to the control group, women in the gender-specific intervention did not differ on rates of any HAS at follow-up but significantly decreased their rates of unprotected HAS. Men in both the gender-specific and the control interventions reported less HAS and unprotected HAS at three-month follow-up compared to baseline, with no treatment condition effect. The mechanism of action for SSSB compared to REMAS in decreasing unprotected HAS is unclear. More attention to HAS in HIV-prevention interventions for heterosexual men and women in substance abuse treatment is warranted.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.