↓ Skip to main content

Motives and barriers to safer sex and regular STI testing among MSM soon after HIV diagnosis

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Infectious Diseases, March 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (60th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (54th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
6 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
23 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
55 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Motives and barriers to safer sex and regular STI testing among MSM soon after HIV diagnosis
Published in
BMC Infectious Diseases, March 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12879-017-2277-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

Titia Heijman, Freke Zuure, Ineke Stolte, Udi Davidovich

Abstract

Understanding why some recently with HIV diagnosed men who have sex with men (MSM) choose for safer sex and regular STI testing, whereas others do not, is important for the development of interventions that aim to improve the sexual health of those newly infected. To gain insight into motives and barriers to condom use and regular STI testing among MSM soon after HIV diagnosis, 30 HIV-positive MSM participated in semi-structured qualitative interviews on sexual health behaviours in the first year after HIV diagnosis. Typical barriers to condom use soon after diagnosis were emotions such as anger, relief, and feelings of vulnerability. Additional barriers were related to pre-diagnosis patterns of sexual-social behaviour that were difficult to change, communication difficulties, and substance use. Barriers to STI testing revolved around perceptions of low STI risk, faulty beliefs, and burdensome testing procedures. The great diversity of motives and barriers to condom use and STI testing creates a challenge to accommodate newly infected men with information, motivation, and communication skills to match their personal needs. An adaptive, tailored intervention can be a promising tool of support.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 55 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 55 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 13 24%
Other 5 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 7%
Student > Bachelor 3 5%
Researcher 3 5%
Other 7 13%
Unknown 20 36%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 12 22%
Nursing and Health Professions 6 11%
Psychology 6 11%
Social Sciences 4 7%
Chemistry 2 4%
Other 2 4%
Unknown 23 42%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 02 May 2017.
All research outputs
#7,820,309
of 23,881,329 outputs
Outputs from BMC Infectious Diseases
#2,654
of 7,931 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#121,356
of 309,993 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Infectious Diseases
#75
of 163 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,881,329 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 67th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,931 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 66% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 309,993 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 60% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 163 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 54% of its contemporaries.