ArticlePerspectives on sexual and reproductive health2024
Sexual choking/strangulation and its association with condom and contraceptive use: Findings from a survey of students at a university in the Midwestern United States.
Article in Perspectives on sexual and reproductive health, 2024. 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.
- Experiences and Perceptions of Risk Among Australian Men Who Have Sex with Men Who Engage in Sexual Strangulation.Archives of sexual behavior · 2026Article
- Sexual choking/strangulation and its association with condom and contraceptive use: Findings from a survey of students at a university in the Midwestern United States.Perspectives on sexual and reproductive health · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionConsensual sexual choking has become prevalent among young United States (US) adults. In sex between women and men, women are overwhelmingly the ones choked, perhaps reproducing traditional heteronormative power dynamics. No research has examined the relationship between being choked during consensual sex and the use of external condoms and other contraceptives.
methodsWe administered a cross-sectional campus-representative survey to 4989 undergraduate students at a large public Midwestern US university.
resultsHalf of respondents (n = 1803) had ever been choked during sex. Having been choked was associated with a significantly lower likelihood of event-level condom use (OR = 0.32 [0.19, 0.54] for >5 times lifetime choking among men and OR = 0.35 [0.27, 0.45] for >5 times lifetime choking among women compared to those with no choking experiences) and in the past 6 months (OR = 0.42 [0.24, 0.72] for >5 times lifetime choking among men and OR = 0.59 [0.43, 0.81] for >5 times lifetime choking among women compared to those with no choking experiences). Also, having ever been choked was associated with a significantly greater likelihood of having used an implant/intra-uterine device in the past 6 months (OR = 1.85 [1.28, 2.68] for >5 times lifetime choking compared to those with no choking experiences).
conclusionRecognition that sexual choking is prevalent among young people has only recently emerged and educational programs are lacking. Study findings could be used to engage people in discussions about choking in relation to gender, power, and reproductive health agency.
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.