MedElevator Войти в исследования
← Поиск публикаций

DOI 10.1207/s15327655jchn2003_03

Медицинская библиотека · Journal of community health nursing · 2003

Pros and cons of condom use among gay and bisexual men as explored via the Internet.

Gullette Donna L, Turner Joan G

СтатьяПеревод пока не подготовлен

Аннотация

The purpose of this study was to conduct a survey utilizing Internet technology related to gay and bisexual men's condom use behavior as an expression of safer sexual practices. A total of 241 self-identified gay and bisexual men responded to the questionnaire in a 3-month period of time. Confidentiality was assured by utilizing an electronic system whereby the respondents e-mail address was eliminated. The study was conceptually guided by the use of the Transtheoretical Model of Behavioral Change (TMC) and the pros and cons of condom of use were explored. Fifty-six percent of the participants reported that one advantage (pro) of using condoms with casual partners was that it would make them safer from disease. About half of the respondents (n = 119, 49%) reported a history of one or more sexually transmitted diseases. There were 14 variables found to be significantly associated with using a condom with primary and casual partners among gay and bisexual men. Essentially, findings from this study corresponded to results obtained by more traditional data collection methods. Therefore, the authors conclude that electronic data collection may well be an alternative means for collecting sensitive data such as those collected in this study.

Для цитирования: Gullette Donna L, Turner Joan G. Pros and cons of condom use among gay and bisexual men as explored via the Internet.. Journal of community health nursing. 2003. DOI: 10.1207/s15327655jchn2003_03.

Предметные рубрики MeSH

Подготовка и перевод публикации
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…

История · было → стало

Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.

Тип публикации указан по данным источника. Уровень доказательности автоматически не присваивается.