ArticleArchives of sexual behavior2020
Defining Sexual Risk in the Era of Biomedical HIV Prevention: Implications for HIV Research and Practice.
Article in Archives of sexual behavior, 2020. 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.
- Examining a multicomponent health promotion intervention among Black same gender loving men in southern ending the HIV epidemic in the U.S. jurisdictions: a randomized controlled trial.BMC public health · 2026Article
- Navigating the Viral Divide: Sexual and Gender Minority Community Perspectives on Treatment as Prevention.AIDS education and prevention : official publication of the International Society for AIDS Education · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Advancing HIV behavioral science and its integration with recent biomedical prevention strategies-treatment as prevention and pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP)-is complicated because traditional definitions of sexual risk (condomless anal sex [CAS] or CAS with a serodiscordant partner) may not suffice given the success of biomedical prevention in the absence of condoms. To better understand how to define and understand risk in the era of biomedical HIV prevention, we assessed correlates of four different definitions of high-risk sexual behavior among a sample of 401 adult HIV-positive MSM (57% African American) residing in the New York City area: (1) a traditional model of risk defined as CAS with an HIV-negative or unknown serostatus partner; (2) a definition that considered participant viral load (VL); (3) a definition that considered partner PrEP use; and (4) a definition that considered participant HIV VL and partner PrEP use. Among participants reporting anal sex (n = 281) with a man in the past 3 months, 42% were considered high risk under Definition 1, 6% under Definition 2, 25% under Definition 3, and 2% under Definition 4. Correlates of risk varied across definitions. For example, while education was the strongest predictor of high-risk sexual behavior in Definitions 1 and 2, alcohol use and enacted stigma were the strongest predictors in the model that only accounted for partner PrEP use (Definition 3). These findings have implications for whom to reach for intervention efforts, the difficulty in meeting recruitment goals, and the types of interventions that should be used.
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.