↓ Skip to main content

Comparing databases: determinants of sexually transmitted infections, HIV diagnoses, and lack of HIV testing among men who have sex with men

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

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (57th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source

Readers on

mendeley
80 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
Comparing databases: determinants of sexually transmitted infections, HIV diagnoses, and lack of HIV testing among men who have sex with men
Published in
BMC Public Health, November 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12889-015-2445-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Chantal den Daas, Maaike Goenee, Bouko H. W. Bakker, Hanneke de Graaf, Eline L. M. Op de Coul

Abstract

Early detection and treatment of STI/HIV are public health priorities. Our objective was to compare characteristics of men who have sex with men (MSM) in Dutch data available in 2010 from EMIS, an international internet survey, Schorer Monitor, a Dutch internet survey, and data from STI- clinic visits, since these might be subject to different and unknown biases. Data from Dutch MSM Internet Surveys (EMISNL N = 3,787; Schorer Monitor, SMON N = 3,602), and 3,800 STI clinic visits (SOAP) were combined into one dataset. We included factors that were measured in all three databases. The socio-demographics included were age (at the time of the survey), zip code, and ethnicity. Behavioural variables included were the number of sexual partners, condom use with last sexual partner, drug use, being diagnosed with STI, being diagnosed with HIV, and HIV testing. Outcomes we investigated were being diagnosed with STI, HIV, and never been tested for HIV. Logistic regressions showed that determinants for being diagnosed with STI were having more sexual partners, drug use, and having had an HIV test (aORs 1.3 to 17.1) in EMIS and SMON. Determinants for being diagnosed with HIV in all three databases were older age, living in Amsterdam, and having more partners (aORs 1.8 to 4.4). In EMIS and SMON, drug use, non-condom use, and having STI were additional determinants (aORs 1.6 to 8.9). Finally, determinants associated with never been tested for HIV were being younger (only SOAP), living outside of Amsterdam, having fewer partners, no drug use, and no STI (aORs 0.2 to 0.8). Risk factors from internet surveys were largely similar, but differed from STI clinics, possibly because it involves self-reports rather than diagnoses or because of differences in timing. The difference between the internet surveys and STI clinic data is much less pronounced for having never been tested, suggesting both are appropriate for this outcome. These findings shed light on conclusions drawn from different data sources, as well as the comparability of recruitment strategies, the robustness of risk factors, consequences of phrasing questions differently, and on (policy) implications based on different data sources.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 80 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 80 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 15 19%
Student > Bachelor 12 15%
Student > Master 10 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 9%
Other 6 8%
Other 11 14%
Unknown 19 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 19 24%
Nursing and Health Professions 11 14%
Psychology 9 11%
Social Sciences 5 6%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 4%
Other 11 14%
Unknown 22 28%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 24 June 2016.
All research outputs
#7,468,944
of 22,833,393 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#7,891
of 14,878 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#95,559
of 282,576 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#129
of 247 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,833,393 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 14,878 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 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% 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 282,576 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 57% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 247 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.