ArticlePloS one2018
Non-consensual condom removal, reported by patients at a sexual health clinic in Melbourne, Australia.
Article in PloS one, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 18 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
18 citing papers in PubMed.
- An Event-Level Investigation of Young Men's Condom Use Resistance: Associations with Global Sex-Related Alcohol Expectancies and Daily Drinking and Sex Motives.Journal of sex research · 2026Article
- Coerced Condomless Sex: A Scoping Review of Qualitative Studies.Journal of sex research · 2025Article
- Facilitators and Barriers to Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis Uptake Willingness for Full-Service Sex Workers: A Social-Ecological Approach.Sociological inquiry · 2024Article
- A Scoping Review of Nonconsensual Condom Removal ("Stealthing") Research.Trauma, violence & abuse · 2024Article
- Article
- Associations Among Alcohol-Related Factors and Men's Nonconsensual Condom Removal Perpetration.Journal of interpersonal violence · 2023Article
- Canadian service providers' perspectives on reproductive coercion and abuse: a participatory action research to address their needs and support their actions.Reproductive health · 2023Article
- Perceptions and experiences of sexual violence among Chinese men who have sex with men in Hong Kong.Journal of advanced nursing · 2023Article
- Reproductive Coercion by Intimate Partners: Prevalence and Correlates in Canadian Individuals with the Capacity to be Pregnant.PloS one · 2023Article
- Stealthing among university students: associated factors.Revista da Escola de Enfermagem da U S P · 2022Article
- Stealthing Perpetration and Victimization: Prevalence and Correlates Among Emerging Adults.Journal of interpersonal violence · 2021Article
- Sexual consent and chemsex: a quantitative study on sexualised drug use and non-consensual sex among men who have sex with men in Amsterdam, the Netherlands.Sexually transmitted infections · 2021Article
- Condoms, Trust and Stealthing: The Meanings Attributed to Unprotected Hetero-Sex.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021Article
- "You Do It without Their Knowledge." Assessing Knowledge and Perception ofInternational journal of environmental research and public health · 2020Article
- A Prospective Examination of Men's Condom Use Resistance: Event-Level Associations with Sexual Aggression, Alcohol Consumption, and Trait Anger.Journal of sex research · 2019Article
- Correction: Non-consensual condom removal, reported by patients at a sexual health clinic in Melbourne, Australia.PloS one · 2019Article
- Article
- Receipt of Coercive Condom Use Resistance: A Scoping Review.Journal of sex researchArticle
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundNon-consensual removal of condoms, colloquially referred to as 'stealthing', is the removal of a condom during sex by a sexual partner when consent has been given for sex with a condom only.
methodsWe conducted a cross-sectional survey to determine how commonly women and men who have sex with men (MSM) attending Melbourne Sexual Health Centre had experienced stealthing, and analysed situational factors associated with the event. Responses were linked to demographic information extracted from patient files.
results1189 of 2883 women (41.2%), and 1063 of 3439 MSM (30.9%) attending the clinic during the study period completed the survey. Thirty-two percent of women (95% CI: 29%,35%) and 19% of MSM (95% CI: 17%,22%) reported having ever experienced stealthing. Women who had been stealthed were more likely to be a current sex worker (Adjusted Odds Ratio [AOR] 2.87, 95% CI: 2.01,4.11, p <0.001). MSM who had experienced stealthing were more likely to report anxiety or depression (AOR 2.13, 95% CI: 1.25,3.60, p = 0.005). Both female and male participants who had experienced stealthing were three times less likely to consider it to be sexual assault than participants who had not experienced it (OR 0.29, 95% CI: 0.22,0.4 and OR 0.31, 95% CI: 0.21,0.45 respectively).
conclusionsA high proportion of women and MSM attending a sexual health service reported having experienced stealthing. While further investigation is needed into the prevalence of stealthing in the general community, clinicians should be aware of this practice and consider integrating this question into their sexual health consultation. Understanding situational factors would assist in the development of preventive strategies, particularly female sex workers and MSM.
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.