Cited by 33HIV/AIDS Research and InterventionsHIV, Drug Use, Sexual RiskAdolescent Sexual and Reproductive Health

Condom use problems during anal sex among men who have sex with men (MSM): findings from the Safe in the City study.

Open access
D'Anna, L.H., Margolis, A.D., Warner, L., Korosteleva, O.A., O'Donnell, L., Rietmeijer, C.A., Klausner, J.D., Nomura, W. +2 more·2012·AIDS Care

Abstract

Our research aims were to: (1) assess the prevalence of two condom use problems: breakage or slippage and partial use (delayed application or early removal) among men who have sex with men (MSM) seeking services in urban US STD clinics; and (2) examine the association between these condom use problems and participant, partner and partnership characteristics. Analysis was restricted to HIV-negative MSM who reported having anal sex at least once in the preceding 3 months and who completed both the baseline and 3 month follow-up assessments. Two models were fitted using the generalized estimating equations (GEE) approach. A total of 263 MSM (median age=32 years) reported 990 partnerships. Partnerships with no condom use 422 (42.6%) were excluded. Thus, 207 MSM and 568 partnerships were included. Among condom users, 100% use was reported within 454 partnerships (79.9%) and <100% within 114 (20.1%), and 21(3.7%) reported both condom use problems, 25 (4.4%) reported only breakage, 67 (11.8%) reported only partial use, and 455 (80.1%) reported no errors. The breakage or slippage and partial use rates per condom used were 3.4% and 11.2%, respectively. A significantly higher rate of breakage or slippage occurred among non-main partnerships. Characteristics associated with increased odds for condom breakage or slippage were: lower education level (OR=2.78; CI: 1.1-7.5), non-main partner status (OR=4.1; CI: 1.5-11.7), and drunk or high during sex (OR=2.0; CI: 1.1-3.8), and for partial use: lower education level (OR=2.6; CI: 1.0-6.6), perceived partner sexually transmitted infections (STI) risk (OR=2.4; CI: 1.3-4.2), and inconsistent condom use (OR=3.7; CI: 2.0-6.6). A high percentage of MSM partnerships reported no condom use and among condom users, a sizable proportion did not use them consistently or correctly. MSM may benefit from interventions designed to increase proficiency for condom use with a particular focus on the behaviors of inconsistent and partial condom use.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/09540121.2012.668285

Cites

27 of 27 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Rates of condom breakage and slippage might be slightly higher during anal intercourse.

    “Rates of breakage and slippage might be slightly higher during anal intercourse (28,29).”

    From Sexually Transmitted Infections Treatment Guidelines, 2021 (2021) · cites this paper as [29]

    The Abstract reports a 3.4% per-condom-use rate of breakage or slippage during anal sex among the MSM studied. The paper does not establish that this rate is higher than during another type of intercourse; the higher rate reported in the Discussion compares non-main with main partnerships, not types of intercourse. No page numbers were provided for these passages. (LLM, conf=0.83)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
D'Anna, L. H., Margolis, A. D., Warner, L., Korosteleva, O. A., O'Donnell, L., Rietmeijer, C. A., Klausner, J. D., Nomura, W., Malotte, C. K., & the Safe City Study Group
Affiliations
  • a Center for Health Care Innovation , California State University , Long Beach , CA , USA
  • Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (US)
  • California State University, Long Beach (US)
  • d Denver Public Health , Denver , CO , USA
  • University of San Francisco (US)
  • University of California, San Francisco (US)
Venue
AIDS Care
Published
2012-04-23
Volume
24
Issue
8
Pages
1028-1038
ISSN
  • 0954-0121 (ISSN-L)
  • 1360-0451
OpenAlex
W2056435433
Cited by
33
References
27
Citations by year
2024: 3 · 2023: 1 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 5
FWCI
2.21
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • AIDS Care (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health
  • Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
  • National Institute on Minority Health and Health Disparities (P20MD003942)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Infectious Diseases › HIV/AIDS Research and Interventions
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › HIV, Drug Use, Sexual Risk
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Adolescent Sexual and Reproductive Health
Keywords
condom breakage, condom slippage, anal sex, men who have sex with men, HIV-negative MSM, STD clinics, alcohol use during sex, inconsistent condom use, HIV prevention, sexual partnerships, educational attainment, sexual risk behavior, HIV prevention interventions
MeSH terms
Adult, Equipment Failure, Humans, Male, Sexual Behavior, United States, Urban Health, Condoms, HIV Seronegativity, Homosexuality, Male

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review