Literature DB >> 18356611

The Internet, HIV serosorting and transmission risk among men who have sex with men, San Francisco.

Mark Berry1, H Fisher Raymond, Timothy Kellogg, Willi McFarland.   

Abstract

In a community-based, time-location sampling survey in San Francisco, Internet-met partners were not more likely to be HIV seroconcordant among HIV-negative and HIV-positive men who have sex with men (MSM) compared with partners met at bars and dance clubs. In addition, HIV-negative MSM were more likely to have unprotected anal intercourse with potentially serodiscordant partners met on the Internet compared with those met at bars and dance clubs (adjusted OR 1.5, 95% CI 1.1-2.0, P = 0.01).

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18356611     DOI: 10.1097/QAD.0b013e3282f55559

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  AIDS        ISSN: 0269-9370            Impact factor:   4.177


  21 in total

1.  Online Social Networking, Sexual Risk and Protective Behaviors: Considerations for Clinicians and Researchers.

Authors:  Ian W Holloway; Shannon Dunlap; Homero E Del Pino; Keith Hermanstyne; Craig Pulsipher; Raphael J Landovitz
Journal:  Curr Addict Rep       Date:  2014-09

Review 2.  Gay and bisexual men's use of the Internet: research from the 1990s through 2013.

Authors:  Christian Grov; Aaron S Breslow; Michael E Newcomb; Joshua G Rosenberger; Jose A Bauermeister
Journal:  J Sex Res       Date:  2014

3.  The Strategies of Heterosexuals from Large Metropolitan Areas for Assessing the Risks of Exposure to HIV or Other Sexually Transmitted Infections from Partners Met Online.

Authors:  Karolynn Siegel; Helen-Maria Lekas; Marie Onaga; Rachel Verni; Hamish Gunn
Journal:  AIDS Patient Care STDS       Date:  2017-03-24       Impact factor: 5.078

4.  An Event-Level Analysis of the Interpersonal Factors Associated With Condomless Anal Sex Among Gay, Bisexual, and Other Men Who Have Sex With Men (MSM) With Online-Met Partners.

Authors:  Kiffer G Card; Nathan J Lachowsky; Zishan Cui; Susan Shurgold; Heather L Armstrong; Ashleigh J Rich; Jamie I Forrest; Maya Gislason; David M Moore; Eric A Roth; Robert S Hogg
Journal:  AIDS Educ Prev       Date:  2017-04

5.  Exploring the role of sex-seeking apps and websites in the social and sexual lives of gay, bisexual and other men who have sex with men: a cross-sectional study.

Authors:  Kiffer G Card; Nathan J Lachowsky; Zishan Cui; Susan Shurgold; Maya Gislason; Jamie I Forrest; Ashleigh J Rich; David Moore; Eric Roth; Robert S Hogg
Journal:  Sex Health       Date:  2017-06       Impact factor: 2.706

6.  HIV status differences in venues where highly sexually active gay and bisexual men meet sex partners: results from a pilot study.

Authors:  Christian Grov; Sarit A Golub; Jeffrey T Parsons
Journal:  AIDS Educ Prev       Date:  2010-12

7.  Are HIV-negative men who have sex with men and who bareback concerned about HIV infection? Implications for HIV risk reduction interventions.

Authors:  Iván C Balán; Alex Carballo-Diéguez; Ana Ventuneac; Robert H Remien; Curtis Dolezal; Jordan Ford
Journal:  Arch Sex Behav       Date:  2012-01-05

Review 8.  As through a glass, darkly: the future of sexually transmissible infections among gay, bisexual and other men who have sex with men.

Authors:  Mark Richard Stenger; Stefan Baral; Shauna Stahlman; Dan Wohlfeiler; Jerusha E Barton; Thomas Peterman
Journal:  Sex Health       Date:  2017-02       Impact factor: 2.706

9.  Prevalence of and Factors Associated with the Use of HIV Serosorting and Other Biomedical Prevention Strategies Among Men Who Have Sex with Men in a US Nationwide Survey.

Authors:  Christian Grov; H Jonathan Rendina; Viraj V Patel; Elizabeth Kelvin; Kathryn Anastos; Jeffrey T Parsons
Journal:  AIDS Behav       Date:  2018-08

10.  Correlates of unprotected receptive anal intercourse among gay and bisexual men: Kampala, Uganda.

Authors:  H Fisher Raymond; Phoebe Kajubi; Moses R Kamya; George W Rutherford; Jeffrey S Mandel; Willi McFarland
Journal:  AIDS Behav       Date:  2009-06-03
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.