Trial reportArchives of sexual behavior2021
Assessing the Reliability of Self-Reported Sexual Behavior Among Male Couples.
Trial report in Archives of sexual behavior, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Coupled gay, bisexual, and other men who have sex with men (GBMSM) are at particularly high risk for HIV, and a clear understanding of behavioral risk is key to effective interventions. Accurate behavioral self-reports are a crucial component of valid sexual health research, yet reliability of these data remains understudied. This study aimed to quantify and identify predictors of dyadic discordance in reported 3-month anal intercourse (AI) occurrence and frequency. Using cross-sectional data from 407 male couples in the U.S. (2016-2017), we calculated proportional dyadic concordance and used dyad-level logistic and linear regression to identify demographic, behavioral, and relationship traits associated with the odds of discordant frequency reports and the relative difference between discordant partner reports. Couples had high levels of concordant reports of 3-month anal AI occurrence (97%) but low interpartner agreement in reported frequency (37%). After adjustment, the odds of discordance were significantly associated with dyadic employment and differences on the Communal Coping to Reduce HIV Threat Scale (CCS) (p < .05). Among frequency-discordant couples, the mean relative difference between partner reports was 52.80% ± 35.91% (M ± SD). After adjustment, relative differences between partners' reported AI frequencies were positively associated with interpartner differences in CCS (p < .05). These results indicate that among GBMSM couples in committed partnerships, self-reported sexual behavior data may be impacted by granularity, recall, and relationship characteristics. Further research in this area is warranted to better understand measurement error in self-reported sexual activity data.
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.