Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32479519›Full record

Observational studyPloS one2020

Characteristics of gay and bisexual men who rarely use HIV risk reduction strategies during condomless anal intercourse: Results from the FLUX national online cohort study.

Johann Kolstee, Martin Holt, Jeff Jin, Mohamed A Hammoud, Louisa Degenhardt, Lisa Maher, Toby Lea, Garrett Prestage

Open access · goldAbstract readObservational Study
In one paragraph

Observational study in PloS one, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.2field-weighted citation impact, top 35% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 10 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Johann KolsteeKirby Institute, UNSW Sydney, Kensington, NSW, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-2668-1823
Martin HoltCentre for Social Research in Health, UNSW Sydney, Kensington, NSW, Australia.
Jeff JinKirby Institute, UNSW Sydney, Kensington, NSW, Australia.
Mohamed A HammoudKirby Institute, UNSW Sydney, Kensington, NSW, Australia.
Louisa DegenhardtNational Drug and Alcohol Research Centre, UNSW Sydney, Kensington, NSW, Australia.
Lisa MaherKirby Institute, UNSW Sydney, Kensington, NSW, Australia.
Toby LeaCentre for Social Research in Health, UNSW Sydney, Kensington, NSW, Australia.
Garrett PrestageKirby Institute, UNSW Sydney, Kensington, NSW, Australia.
UNSW Sydney · AUBurnet Institute · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo understand the characteristics of a minority of Australian gay and bisexual men (GBM) who, despite an increase in the number and availability of HIV risk reduction strategies, do not consistently use a strategy to protect themselves from HIV.

methodsThis analysis is based on data from 2,920 participants in a national, online, prospective observational cohort study. GBM who never or rarely used HIV risk reduction strategies (NRR) were compared with two groups using multivariate logistic regression: i) GBM using pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) and ii) GBM frequently using risk reduction strategies (FRR) other than PrEP.

resultsCompared to PrEP users, NRR men were younger (p<0.0001), less socially engaged with gay men (p<0.0001) and less likely to have completed a postgraduate (p<0.05) or undergraduate degree (p<0.05). They were also less likely to have recently used amyl nitrite (p<0.05), erectile dysfunction medication (p<0.05) and cocaine (p<0.05) in the previous 6 months. Compared with FRR men, NRR men were less likely to have completed a postgraduate (p<0.0001) or undergraduate degree (p<0.05), scored higher on the sexual sensation-seeking scale (p<0.0001) and were more likely to identify as versatile (p<0.05), a bottom (p<0.05) or very much a bottom (p<0.05) during anal sex.

conclusionsNRR men were largely similar to other Australian GBM. However, our analysis suggests it may be appropriate to focus HIV prevention interventions on younger, less socially engaged and less educated GBM, as well as men who prefer receptive anal intercourse to promote the use of effective HIV risk reduction strategies.

Indexed as

Risk Reduction BehaviorAdultAge FactorsAustraliaCondomsEducational StatusHIV InfectionsHumansInternetMaleMiddle AgedPre-Exposure ProphylaxisProspective StudiesSafe SexSexual and Gender MinoritiesYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID32479519
PMCPMC7263606
OpenAlexW3028710625

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.