↓ Skip to main content

Open, Closed, or In Between: Relationship Configuration and Condom Use Among Men Who Use the Internet to Seek Sex with Men

Overview of attention for article published in AIDS and Behavior, September 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
24 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
82 Mendeley
Title
Open, Closed, or In Between: Relationship Configuration and Condom Use Among Men Who Use the Internet to Seek Sex with Men
Published in
AIDS and Behavior, September 2012
DOI 10.1007/s10461-012-0316-9
Pubmed ID
Authors

Sonya S. Brady, Alex Iantaffi, Dylan L. Galos, B. R. Simon Rosser

Abstract

Nearly 70 % of HIV+ men who have sex with men (MSM) are estimated to have contracted HIV from a main partner. We examine whether condom use varies by relationship configuration, including open relationships with and without cheating. 656 MSM in committed relationships were recruited through a sexually explicit social networking website. Of the 55 % of MSM who had anal sex with a non-main partner in the past 90 days, two-thirds did not use a condom. Adjusting for covariates, MSM in relationships characterized as open with cheating versus monogamous were more likely to have unprotected anal sex with both main and non-main partners. MSM who perceived that their partner played around or cheated were more likely to have unprotected anal sex with a non-main partner. Prevention messages should attempt to reduce cheating and increase personal responsibility for protecting partners from HIV. Messages should be tailored to reflect open and monogamous relationships.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 82 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 1%
United States 1 1%
Unknown 80 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 18 22%
Student > Master 15 18%
Researcher 12 15%
Student > Bachelor 7 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 6%
Other 16 20%
Unknown 9 11%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Social Sciences 21 26%
Psychology 16 20%
Nursing and Health Professions 15 18%
Medicine and Dentistry 11 13%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 1%
Other 4 5%
Unknown 14 17%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 27 September 2017.
All research outputs
#15,167,287
of 24,078,959 outputs
Outputs from AIDS and Behavior
#2,259
of 3,600 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#102,272
of 174,357 outputs
Outputs of similar age from AIDS and Behavior
#41
of 69 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,078,959 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,600 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.0. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 174,357 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 69 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.