ArticlePloS one2020
Sexual behaviour and STI testing among Dutch swingers: A cross-sectional internet based survey performed in 2011 and 2018.
Article in PloS one, 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, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- "Very Safety-Conscious and Consent-Focused": Exploring Harm Reduction Practices at Group Sex Events.Archives of sexual behavior · 2026Article
- A Trend Analysis of Condom use in Spanish Young People over the Two Past Decades, 1999-2020.AIDS and behavior · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSwingers, heterosexuals who, as couples, practice mate swapping or group sex with other couples or heterosexual singles, are at risk for sexually transmitted infections (STIs). Therefore, the aim of this study was to assess changes in sexual behaviour and STI testing behaviour, as well as predictors of STI testing.
methodsTwo cross-sectional studies were performed, using the same internet survey in 2011 and 2018. For trend analysis, sexual behaviour and STI testing behaviour were used. Socio-demographics, swinger characteristics, sexual behaviour, and psycho-social variables were used to assess predictors of STI testing in the past year, using multivariable regression analysis.
resultsA total of 1173 participants completed the survey in 2011, and 1005 in 2018. Condom use decreased for vaginal (73% vs. 60%), oral (5% vs. 2%), and anal sex (85% vs. 75%). STI positivity was reported in 23% and 30% of the participants, respectively, although testing for STI was comparable between both years (~65%). The following predictors of STI testing were significant: being female (OR = 1.9, 95%CI: 1.2-2.9), having a high swinging frequency (>12 times a year, OR = 3.7, 95%CI: 1.9-7.3), swinging at home (OR = 1.6, 95%CI: 1.0-2.7), receiving a partner notification (OR = 1.7, 95%CI: 1.2-2.6), considering STI testing important (OR = 4.3, 95%CI: 2.2-8.5), experiencing no pressure from a partner to test (OR = 0.6, 95%CI: 0.3-0.9), partners test for STI regularly (OR = 10.0, 95%CI: 6.2-15.9), perceiving STI testing as an obligation (OR = 2.1, 95%CI: 1.3-3.5), experiencing no barriers such as being afraid of testing (OR = 1.9, 95%CI: 1.2-3.1), limited opening hours (OR = 1.6, 95%CI: 1.0-2.4), and forgetting to plan appointments (OR = 3.0, 95%CI: 2.0-4.6).
conclusionsSwingers exhibit self-selection for STI testing based on their sexual behaviour. However, STI prevention efforts are still important considering the increasing numbers of reported STIs, the decreased use of condom use, and the one-third of swingers who were not tested in the previous year.
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.