Recent heterosexual partnerships and patterns of condom use: A weighted analysis

Epidemiology

Volumn 20, Issue 1, 2009, Pages 44-51

  Copas, Andrew J ^a,b   Mercer, Catherine H ^a   Farewell, Vern T ^c   Nanchahal, Kiran ^d   Johnson, Anne M ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY COLLEGE LONDON   (United Kingdom)

^b MRC CLINICAL TRIALS UNIT   (United Kingdom)

^c MRC BIOSTATISTICS UNIT   (United Kingdom)

^d LONDON SCHOOL OF HYGIENE AND TROPICAL MEDICINE   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; CONDOM; CONTROLLED STUDY; FEMALE; HETEROSEXUALITY; HUMAN; MALE; MATHEMATICAL MODEL; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS; SEXUAL BEHAVIOR; SEXUAL INTERCOURSE;

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; ALGORITHMS; CONDOMS; DATA INTERPRETATION, STATISTICAL; ENGLAND; FEMALE; HEALTH SURVEYS; HUMANS; INTERVIEWS AS TOPIC; MALE; SEXUAL BEHAVIOR; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 67651089756     PISSN: 10443983     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/EDE.0b013e318187ac81     Document Type: Article

References (19)

1. Macaluso M, Demand MJ, Artz LM, et al. Partner type and condom use. AIDS. 2000;14:537-546.
2. Anderson JE. Condom use and HIV risk among US adults. Am J Pub Health. 2003;93:912-914.
3. Lansky A, Thomas JC, Earp JA. Partner-specific sexual behaviours among persons with both main and other partners. Fam Plann Perspect. 1998;30:93-96.
4. Messiah A, Pelletier A, Spira A, et al. Partner-specific sexual practices among heterosexual men and women with multiple partners: results from the French national survey, ACSF. Arch Sex Behav. 1996;25:233-247.
5. Johnson AM, Mercer CH, Erens B, et al. Sexual behaviour in Britain: partnerships, practices, and HIV risk behaviours. Lancet. 2001;358: 1835-1842.
6. Ciccarone DH, Kanouse DE, Collins RL, et al. Sex without disclosure of positive HIV serostatus in a US probability sample of persons receiving medical care for HIV infection. Am J Pub Health. 2005;93:949-954.
7. Luke N. Confronting the 'sugar daddy' stereotype: age and economic asymmetries and risky sexual behaviour in urban Kenya. Int Fam Plan Persp. 2005;31:6-14.
8. Hoffman EB, Sen PK, Weinberg CR. Within-cluster resampling. Biometrika. 2001;88:1121-1134.
9. Williamson JM, Datta S, Satten GA. Marginal analyses of clustered data when cluster size is informative. Biometrics. 2003;59:36-42.
10. Williamson JM, Hae-Young K, Warner L. Weighting condom use data to account for nonignorable cluster size. Ann Epidem. 2007;17:603-607.
11. Hernan MA, Brumback BA, Robins JM. Estimating the causal effect of zidovudine on CD4 count with a marginal structural model for repeated measures. Stat in Med. 2002;21:1689-1709.
12. Robins JM, Rotnitzky A, Zhao LP. Analysis of semiparametric regression models for repeated outcomes in the presence of missing data. J Am Statist Ass. 1995;90:106-121.
13. Slama R, Ducot B, Carstensen L, et al. Feasibility of the current-duration approach to studying human fecundity. Epidemiology. 2006;17:440-449.
14. Lynn P, Clarke P. Separating refusal bias and non-contact bias: Evidence from UK national surveys. The Statistician. 2002;51:319-333.
15. Copas AJ, Farewell VT. Dealing with non-ignorable non-response using an 'enthusiasm to respond' variable. J Roy Statist Soc A. 1998;161:385-396.
16. Zenilman JM, Weisman CS, Rompolo AM, et al. Condom use to prevent incident STDs: the validity of self-reported condom use. Sex Transm Dis. 1995;22:15-21.
17. Pfeffermann D, Skinner CJ, Holmes DJ, et al. Weighting for unequal selection probabilities in multilevel models (with discussion). J Roy Statist Soc B. 1998;60:23-56.
18. Dunson DB, Chen Z, Harry J. A Bayesian approach for joint modeling of cluster size and subunit-specific outcomes. Biometrics. 2003;59:521-530.
19. Cassell J, Mercer CH, Imrie J, et al. Who uses condoms with whom? Evidence from national probability sample surveys. Sex Transm Inf. 2006;82:467-473.