↓ Skip to main content

Correlates of Condom-Associated Erection Problems in Young, Heterosexual Men: Condom Fit, Self-Efficacy, Perceptions, and Motivations

Overview of attention for article published in AIDS and Behavior, February 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (84th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (81st percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
5 X users
facebook
3 Facebook pages
wikipedia
2 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
23 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
41 Mendeley
Title
Correlates of Condom-Associated Erection Problems in Young, Heterosexual Men: Condom Fit, Self-Efficacy, Perceptions, and Motivations
Published in
AIDS and Behavior, February 2013
DOI 10.1007/s10461-013-0422-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Stephanie A. Sanders, Brandon J. Hill, Richard A. Crosby, Erick Janssen

Abstract

Questionnaire data from 479 heterosexual men 18-24 years old were analyzed for correlates of CAEP during application (CAEP-Application) and CAEP during penile-vaginal intercourse (CAEP-PVI). Potential correlates were self-efficacy (condom application, product selection, and maintaining arousal), condom perceptions (condom worry/distraction, negative condom perceptions, concerns about application speed), condom fit, and motivation to use condoms. We conclude that (1) experiencing CAEP may become a repeating cycle, both affecting and being affected by, worry and distraction related to losing erections and maintaining arousal while using a condom (2) poorly fitting condoms may contribute to CAEP, and (3) CAEP may decrease motivation to use condoms.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 41 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 2 5%
Unknown 39 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 10 24%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 10%
Student > Bachelor 4 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 7%
Student > Postgraduate 3 7%
Other 9 22%
Unknown 8 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 12 29%
Nursing and Health Professions 6 15%
Social Sciences 5 12%
Psychology 4 10%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 2%
Other 5 12%
Unknown 8 20%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. 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 12 March 2022.
All research outputs
#4,636,257
of 25,641,627 outputs
Outputs from AIDS and Behavior
#662
of 3,696 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#46,838
of 297,902 outputs
Outputs of similar age from AIDS and Behavior
#11
of 59 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,641,627 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 81st percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,696 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.5. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% of its peers.
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 297,902 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 59 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% of its contemporaries.