ArticleSubstance use & misuse2018
Repeated Measures Analysis of Alcohol Patterns among Gay and Bisexual Men in the Momentum Health Study.
Article in Substance use & misuse, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Excessive Drinking Among Men Who Have Sex With Men Recruited From Web-Based Resources: Cross-sectional Questionnaire Study.JMIR public health and surveillance · 2022Article
- Characteristics of the HIV cascade of care and unsuppressed viral load among gay, bisexual and other men who have sex with men living with HIV across Canada's three largest cities.Journal of the International AIDS Society · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThis study analyzed repeated study visits (n = 2,624) of 693 gay and bisexual men (GBM) in the Momentum Health Study from July, 2012 to June, 2015. Based on recent cross-sectional analyses, we hypothesized that over the study period: (1) hazardous drinking levels would remain high, (2) GBM classified as Hazardous Drinkers will be consistently associated with high risk sex, and (3) GBM classified as Always Hazardous Drinkers differ significantly from Sometimes Hazardous Drinkers.
methodsAUDIT classified participants as Non-Hazardous Drinkers or Hazardous Drinkers, the Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel Test assessed hazardous drinking trends, and Generalized Estimating Equations (GEE) analysis identified Hazardous Drinking covariates. Logistic regression analysis of participants with at least two study visits (575) compared those who were Sometimes Hazardous Drinkers (n = 171) with Always Hazardous Drinkers (n = 129).
resultsAt baseline 40% of participants were Hazardous Drinkers, but there was a significant decline in hazardous drinking by visit and Hazardous Drinkers were not significantly associated with high risk sex. Always Hazardous Drinkers had significantly more high risk sex and gay bar attendance, but less often sought Internet sex partners compared to Sometimes Hazardous Drinkers.
conclusionsAnalyses did not support the first two hypotheses, but distinguishing between Always and Sometimes Hazardous drinkers identified a young GBM subgroup associated with significantly higher levels of high risk sex and social support measures. These results suggest interventions programs based on Social Norms Theory, which predicts peer norms among youth are important factors in regulating drinking patterns, may be effective for these men.
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.