Defining Sexual Risk in the Era of Biomedical HIV Prevention: Implications for HIV Research and Practice.

Clicks: 367
ID: 62353
2019
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score — reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
Steady

Ranked #5 of 29 articles by views in Archives of sexual behavior

Most read Least read

Bar heights use a square-root scale.

Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet minted

Create a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.

5 SUSD one-off · no wallet required
Sign in to mint
Abstract
Advancing HIV behavioral science and its integration with recent biomedical prevention strategies-treatment as prevention and pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP)-is complicated because traditional definitions of sexual risk (condomless anal sex [CAS] or CAS with a serodiscordant partner) may not suffice given the success of biomedical prevention in the absence of condoms. To better understand how to define and understand risk in the era of biomedical HIV prevention, we assessed correlates of four different definitions of high-risk sexual behavior among a sample of 401 adult HIV-positive MSM (57% African American) residing in the New York City area: (1) a traditional model of risk defined as CAS with an HIV-negative or unknown serostatus partner; (2) a definition that considered participant viral load (VL); (3) a definition that considered partner PrEP use; and (4) a definition that considered participant HIV VL and partner PrEP use. Among participants reporting anal sex (n = 281) with a man in the past 3 months, 42% were considered high risk under Definition 1, 6% under Definition 2, 25% under Definition 3, and 2% under Definition 4. Correlates of risk varied across definitions. For example, while education was the strongest predictor of high-risk sexual behavior in Definitions 1 and 2, alcohol use and enacted stigma were the strongest predictors in the model that only accounted for partner PrEP use (Definition 3). These findings have implications for whom to reach for intervention efforts, the difficulty in meeting recruitment goals, and the types of interventions that should be used.
Reference Key
horvath2019definingarchives Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
Authors Horvath, Keith J;Lammert, Sara;Martinka, Aldona;Erickson, Darin;
Journal Archives of sexual behavior
Year 2019
DOI
10.1007/s10508-019-01499-8
URL
Keywords
men who have sex with men viral load prep hiv risk condomless sex

Citations

No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org

Comments

No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.