Cited by 263HIV, Drug Use, Sexual RiskHIV/AIDS Research and InterventionsHIV, TB, and STIs Epidemiology

Sex on demand: geosocial networking phone apps and risk of sexually transmitted infections among a cross-sectional sample of men who have sex with men in Los Angeles County.

Open access
Beymer, Matthew R, Weiss, Robert E, Bolan, Robert K, Rudy, Ellen T, Bourque, Linda B, Rodriguez, Jeffrey P, Morisky, Donald E·2014·Sexually Transmitted Infections

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Geosocial networking applications (GSN apps) used for meeting sexual partners have become increasingly popular with men who have sex with men (MSM) since 2009. The current study aimed to determine if self-identified HIV-negative, MSM clinic attendees who used GSN apps have an increased incidence of sexually transmitted infections (STI) compared to self-identified HIV-negative, MSM attendees who met sexual partners via in-person venues, such as bars or clubs or through MSM-specific hook-up websites. METHODS: Data were collected between August 2011 and January 2013 on all self-identified HIV-negative, MSM clients visiting the L.A. Gay & Lesbian Center for STI screening. A total of 7184 individuals tested for STIs and self-reported behaviours on drug use and social networking methods to meet sexual partners. Multivariate logistic regression models were used to analyse the results. RESULTS: Individuals who used GSN apps for meeting sexual partners had greater odds of testing positive for gonorrhoea (OR: 1.25; 95% CI 1.06 to 1.48) and for chlamydia (OR: 1.37; 95% CI 1.13 to 1.65) compared to individuals who met partners through in-person methods only. There were no significant differences in syphilis and HIV incidence between those who met partners via in-person venues only, on the internet or through GSN apps. CONCLUSIONS: The present study concludes that sexual health clinic MSM attendees who are meeting on GSN apps are at greater risk for gonorrhoea and chlamydia than MSM attendees who meet in-person or on the internet. Future interventions should explore the use of these novel technologies for testing promotion, prevention and education.

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 · 10.1136/sextrans-2013-051494

Cites

16 of 16 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?

  • Internet use might facilitate sexual encounters and STI transmission among MSM, and many men report using hookup sites to meet partners.

    “Internet use might facilitate sexual encounters and STI transmission among MSM, and many men report using hookup sites to meet partners (242–245).”

    From Sexually Transmitted Infections Treatment Guidelines, 2021 (2021) · cites this paper as [245]

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
Beymer, M. R., Weiss, R. E., Bolan, R. K., Rudy, E. T., Bourque, L. B., Rodriguez, J. P., & Morisky, D. E.
Affiliations
  • University of California, Los Angeles (US)
  • Los Angeles LGBT Center (US)
  • Los Angeles County Department of Public Health (US)
Corresponding author
Beymer, Matthew R
Venue
Sexually Transmitted Infections
Publisher
BMJ
Published
2014-06-12
Volume
90
Issue
7
Pages
567-572
ISSN
  • 0007-134X (ISSN-L)
  • 1368-4973
  • 1472-3263
OpenAlex
W2118637531
Cited by
262
References
16
Citations by year
2026: 8 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 15 · 2023: 18 · 2022: 11 · 2021: 22 · 2020: 20 · 2019: 29 · 2018: 34 · 2017: 30 · 2016: 47 · 2015: 14 · 2014: 4 · 2013: 1
FWCI
23.80
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Sexually Transmitted Infections (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
  • eScholarship (California Digital Library) (submittedVersion)
  • HighWire Press Open Archive (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institute of Mental Health (P30MH058107)
  • National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (P30AI028697)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › HIV, Drug Use, Sexual Risk
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Infectious Diseases › HIV/AIDS Research and Interventions
  • Social Sciences › General Social Sciences › HIV, TB, and STIs Epidemiology
Keywords
geosocial networking apps, men who have sex with men, gonorrhea, chlamydia, syphilis, HIV-negative men, online dating, STI screening, Los Angeles
MeSH terms
Adult, Bisexuality, Chlamydia Infections, Cross-Sectional Studies, Gonorrhea, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Sexual Behavior, Sexually Transmitted Diseases, Syphilis, Los Angeles, HIV Infections, Multivariate Analysis, Logistic Models, Homosexuality, Male, Young Adult, Social Networking, Geographic Mapping, Mobile Applications

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