↓ Skip to main content

Factors associated with sexual risk behaviors with non-steady partners and lack of recent HIV testing among German men who have sex with men in steady relationships: results from a cross-sectional…

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Public Health, July 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (51st percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
12 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
75 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
Factors associated with sexual risk behaviors with non-steady partners and lack of recent HIV testing among German men who have sex with men in steady relationships: results from a cross-sectional internet survey
Published in
BMC Public Health, July 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12889-015-1987-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Sarah C. Kramer, Jochen Drewes, Martin Kruspe, Ulrich Marcus

Abstract

Recent evidence suggests that the majority of HIV transmissions among men who have sex with men (MSM) occur between steady partners. We sought to determine factors associated with HIV transmission risks in steady partnerships. Data is from the German cross-sectional 2013 Gay Men and AIDS survey. The study population was HIV-negative or untested men reporting a steady partnership and at least one non-steady anal sex partner in the previous year. Bivariate and multivariate logistic regression was used to determine which of several independent variables best predicted both unprotected anal intercourse (UAI) with a non-steady partner and lack of HIV testing in the past year (high-risk outcome group). The study population consisted of 1731 men. Among individuals in the outcome group (n = 271), 67 % reported UAI with a non-steady partner of unknown status and 9 % reported UAI with a non-steady HIV-positive partner in the past 12 months; 55 % considered themselves to be at low risk for HIV acquisition. In multivariate analyses (n = 1304), participants were statistically more likely to belong to the outcome group if they reported UAI with their steady partner in the past year (OR = 2.21), did not know their steady partner's HIV status (OR = 1.98), or agreed that condoms were disruptive during sex (OR = 3.82 (strongly agree), OR = 2.19 (agree)). Participants were less likely to belong to the outcome group if they were out to their primary doctor (OR = 0.54), were well-educated about post-exposure prophylaxis (OR = 0.46), had sought information on HIV in the past year and kept condoms in an accessible place (OR = 0.20), or believed that insisting on condoms would lead partners to assume they were HIV-negative (OR = 0.20). Participants in the outcome group were more likely to say they would use HIV home tests (OR = 1.58) or pre-exposure prophylaxis (OR = 2.11). Based on our results, we reflect on HIV prevention measures that should be improved in order to better target behaviors that may lead to HIV transmission between MSM in steady relationships. In particular, we highlight the need for multifaceted interventions focusing not only on members of the at-risk community themselves, but on communities as a whole.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 75 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Brazil 1 1%
Unknown 74 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 14 19%
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 15%
Student > Master 9 12%
Student > Bachelor 7 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 7%
Other 9 12%
Unknown 20 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 15 20%
Medicine and Dentistry 13 17%
Social Sciences 10 13%
Psychology 5 7%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 5%
Other 7 9%
Unknown 21 28%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 30 September 2017.
All research outputs
#13,441,810
of 22,818,766 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#9,544
of 14,865 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#123,569
of 263,414 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#181
of 277 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,818,766 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 14,865 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.9. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 263,414 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 51% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 277 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.