| Literature DB >> 22448214 |
Souradet Y Shaw1, Robert R Lorway, Kathleen N Deering, Lisa Avery, H L Mohan, Parinita Bhattacharjee, Sushena Reza-Paul, Shajy Isac, Banadakoppa M Ramesh, Reynold Washington, Stephen Moses, James F Blanchard.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: There is a lack of information on sexual violence (SV) among men who have sex with men and transgendered individuals (MSM-T) in southern India. As SV has been associated with HIV vulnerability, this study examined health related behaviours and practices associated with SV among MSM-T.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2012 PMID: 22448214 PMCID: PMC3308942 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0031705
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Crude (OR) and Adjusted odds ratios (AOR) and 95% confidence intervals (95%CI) from weighted logistic regression models examining correlates of sexual violence among men who have sex with men and transgenders (MSM-T), stratified by sex work status, Karnataka, South India (2008)*.
| Violence Prevalence (%) | OR | 95% CI | AOR | 95% CI | P | ||
|
| |||||||
| Age (mean) | 26.9 | 0.99 | (0.94,1.03) | 0.97 | (0.95,1.06) | .276 | |
| Identity | Bisexual/Panthi/Other | 39.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
| Double decker | 19.9 | 0.39 | (0.05,3.28) | 1.15 | (0.17,7.79) | .884 | |
| Kothi/Hijra | 31.7 | 0.72 | (0.10,5.48) | 1.23 | (0.17,8.76) | .834 | |
| Currently Married | No | 29.7 |
|
|
|
|
|
| Yes | 20.4 | 0.61 | (0.25,1.49) | 0.92 | (0.32,2.67) | .881 | |
| Has main male sex partner | No | 17.5 |
|
|
|
|
|
| Yes | 35.2 | 2.56 | (1.12,5.89) | 1.82 | (0.77,4.32) | .166 | |
| District | Belgaum | 22.9 |
|
|
|
|
|
| Bellary | 36.4 | 1.92 | (0.71,5.20) | 1.50 | (0.48,4.75) | .477 | |
| Shimoga | 25.0 | 1.12 | (0.28,4.56) | 1.52 | (0.36,6.33) | .558 | |
| Mysore | 30.1 | 1.45 | (0.58,3.63) | 1.61 | (0.47,5.45) | .434 | |
| Non-regular male sex partners, past week | 0 | 18.3 |
|
|
|
|
|
| 1–4 | 26.9 | 1.64 | (0.57,4.74) | 1.57 | (0.47,5.27) | .452 | |
| 5+ | 52.4 | 4.90 | (1.58,15.17) | 4.08 | (1.17,14.26) | .029 | |
| HIV status | Negative | 24.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
| Positive | 40.8 | 2.19 | (0.75,6.34) | 2.44 | (0.63,9.48) | .192 | |
|
| |||||||
| Age (mean) | 27.4 | 0.93 | (0.88,0.97) | 0.92 | (0.87,0.97) | .002 | |
| Identity | Bisexual/Panthi/Other | 4.3 |
|
|
|
|
|
| Double decker | 10.3 | 2.58 | (0.81,8.22) | 2.73 | (0.76,9.85) | .121 | |
| Kothi/Hijra | 19.0 | 5.25 | (1.43,19.23) | 6.00 | (1.25,28.81) | .026 | |
| Currently Married | No | 16.6 |
|
|
|
|
|
| Yes | 7.0 | 0.38 | (0.18,0.79) | 1.02 | (0.42,2.50) | .958 | |
| Has main male sex partner | No | 9.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
| Yes | 13.9 | 1.63 | (0.75,3.55) | 1.17 | (0.49,2.80) | .715 | |
| District | Belgaum | 10.3 |
|
|
|
|
|
| Bellary | 13.5 | 1.37 | (0.45,4.15) | 1.01 | (0.30,3.46) | .986 | |
| Shimoga | 8.9 | 0.86 | (0.27,2.74) | 0.66 | (0.18,2.43) | .525 | |
| Mysore | 33.3 | 4.38 | (1.84,10.45) | 2.00 | (0.71,5.69) | .187 | |
| Non-regular male sex partners, past week | 0 | 10.2 |
|
|
|
|
|
| 1–4 | 11.9 | 1.18 | (0.54,2.57) | 1.36 | (0.60,3.08) | .455 | |
| 5+ | 4.0 | 0.37 | (0.07,2.08) | 0.29 | (0.04,1.79) | .179 | |
| HIV positive status | Negative | 10.5 |
|
|
|
|
|
| Positive | 12.7 | 1.24 | (0.28,5.61) | 1.49 | (0.31,7.24) | .614 |
All percentages are weighted percentages;
P-value reported for adjusted analyses only.
Kothis: those who primarily practice receptive anal sex; Hijras: transgenders who often self-identify as female; Panthis: those who primarily practice insertive anal sex; Double-deckers: those who practice both insertive/receptive anal sex.
Crude (RR) and adjusted relative risk ratios (ARR) and 95% confidence intervals (95%CI) from weighted negative binomial regression models examining association between general and sexually transmitted infections-related physician utilizations (past 1 year) and sexual violence among men who have sex with men and transgenders (MSM-T), by total sample and stratified by sex work status, Karnataka, South India (2008).
| Mean Utilization | RR | 95% CI | ARR | 95% CI | P value | ||
|
|
| ||||||
| Did not experience violence | 10.3 |
|
|
|
| .012 | |
| Experienced violence | 12.5 | 1.30 | (1.01,1.67) | 1.35 | (1.07,1.71) | ||
|
| |||||||
| Did not experience violence | 12.0 |
|
|
|
| .012 | |
| Experienced violence | 16.6 | 1.39 | (0.87,2.21) | 1.74 | (1.14,2.66) | ||
|
| |||||||
| Did not experience violence | 9.8 |
|
|
|
| .284 | |
| Experienced violence | 10.3 | 1.04 | (0.74,1.49) | 1.21 | (0.85,1.73) | ||
|
|
| ||||||
| Did not experience violence | 1.5 |
|
|
|
| .835 | |
| Experienced violence | 1.7 | 1.13 | (0.63,2.03) | 1.07 | (0.55,2.09) | ||
|
| |||||||
| Did not experience violence | 2.5 |
|
|
|
| .302 | |
| Experienced violence | 2.1 | 0.82 | (0.33,2.02) | 1.60 | (0.64,3.99) | ||
|
| |||||||
| Did not experience violence | 1.2 |
| – |
| – | .160 | |
| Experienced violence | 1.4 | 1.14 | (0.52,2.53) | 0.58 | (0.27,1.25) |
P-value reported for adjusted analyses only; models adjusted for age, sexual identity, marital status, district, number of unknown partners, presence of a main sexual partner and HIV status.