| Title |
Population Size Estimates for Men who Have Sex with Men and Persons who Inject Drugs
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Urban Health, June 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s11524-015-9970-3 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Alexandra M. Oster, Maya Sternberg, Amy Lansky, Dita Broz, Cyprian Wejnert, Gabriela Paz-Bailey |
| Abstract |
Understanding geographic variation in the numbers of men who have sex with men (MSM) and persons who inject drugs (PWID) is critical to targeting and scaling up HIV prevention programs, but population size estimates are not available at generalizable sub-national levels. We analyzed 1999-2010 National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey data on persons aged 18-59 years. We estimated weighted prevalence of recent (past 12 month) male-male sex and injection drug use by urbanicity (the degree to which a geographic area is urban) and US census region and calculated population sizes. Large metro areas (population ≥1,000,000) had higher prevalence of male-male sex (central areas, 4.4 % of men; fringe areas, 2.5 %) compared with medium/small metro areas (1.4 %) and nonmetro areas (1.1 %). Injection drug use did not vary by urbanicity and neither varied by census region. Three-quarters of MSM, but only half of PWID, resided in large metro areas. Two-thirds of MSM and two-thirds of PWID resided in the South and West. Efforts to reach MSM would benefit from being focused in large metro areas, while efforts to reach PWID should be delivered more broadly. These data allow for more effective allocation of funds for prevention programs. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 2 | 33% |
| Unknown | 4 | 67% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 6 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 55 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 55 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 12 | 22% |
| Student > Master | 8 | 15% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 6 | 11% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 5 | 9% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 5 | 9% |
| Other | 10 | 18% |
| Unknown | 9 | 16% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 13 | 24% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 8 | 15% |
| Social Sciences | 7 | 13% |
| Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 3 | 5% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 2 | 4% |
| Other | 10 | 18% |
| Unknown | 12 | 22% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 29. 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 January 2020.
All research outputs
#1,150,756
of 22,824,164 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Urban Health
#169
of 1,287 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#15,310
of 263,200 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Urban Health
#1
of 9 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,824,164 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 94th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,287 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 23.3. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% 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 263,200 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 9 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them