Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33789174›Full record

ArticleSexual medicine2021

Lubrication Practices and Receptive Anal Sex: Implications for STI Transmission and Prevention.

Austin Lee, Thomas W Gaither, Marvin E Langston, Stephanie E Cohen, Benjamin N Breyer

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Sexual medicine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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

5 authors.

Austin LeeDepartment of Urology, University of California-San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA.
Thomas W GaitherDepartment of Urology, University of California-San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA; Department of Urology, University of California-Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
Marvin E LangstonDivision of Research, Kaiser Permanente Northern California, Oakland, CA, USA.
Stephanie E CohenPopulation Health Division, San Francisco Department of Public Health, San Francisco, CA, USA; Division of Infectious Diseases, University of California-San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA.
Benjamin N BreyerDepartment of Urology, University of California-San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA; Department of Biostatistics and Epidemiology, University of California-San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA. Electronic address: Benjamin.Breyer@ucsf.edu.

Funding

UCSF-Kaiser Urological Epidemiology Research Career Development ProgramK12DK111028 · NIDDK · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN FRANCISCO · PI HUANG, ALISON · 2016 to 2025
$5.3M
NIDDK NIH HHS K12 DK111028
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionImplications of lubricant use in men having sex with men (MSM) are poorly characterized, particularly associations with sexual behavior and rectal sexually transmitted infection (STI) risk.

aimWe sought to clarify covariates associated with lubrication type including differing sexual preferences and rectal STI prevalence.

methodsPrimary English-speaking individuals ≥18 years old visiting San Francisco City Clinic (SFCC) between April and May of 2018 who endorsed lubricant use during receptive anal sex within the last 3 months were studied. Associations between lubrication type used and collected covariates were assessed using Kruskal-Wallis analysis of variance for continuous variables and Chi-squared test for categorical variables. We used logistic regression to examine the association between lubrication type and rectal STI test result.

main outcome measuresRectal STI test positivity.

resultsFrom all enrolled participants, 179 completed the survey and endorsed use of a lubricant during receptive anal sex within the last 3 months. Silicone lubricant users had the most sexual partners in the last 3 months (13 [mean] ± 30 [SD], P= .0003) and were most likely to have a history of gonorrhea. Oil-based lubricant users had the most partners with whom they had receptive anal sex in the last 3 months (7 ± 6, P= .03). Water-based lubricant users most commonly used a condom in their last sexual encounter and had the fewest sexual partners in the last 3 months (4 ± 4, P= .0003). Spit/saliva lubricant use was associated with positive rectal STI result.

conclusionSilicone and oil-based lubricant users were more likely to report condomless receptive anal sex and to have a history of gonorrhea while spit/saliva lubricant use associated with positive rectal STI acquisition. Lee A, Gaither TW, Langston ME, et al. Lubrication Practices and Receptive Anal Sex: Implications for STI Transmission and Prevention. Sex Med 2021;9:100341.

Indexed as

AnorectalLubricationPracticeSexually Transmitted Infection

Identifiers

PMID33789174
PMCPMC8240147

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.