Table 3.
Condomless sex vs. No sex
| ||
---|---|---|
expB | 95%CI | |
|
||
Age | 0.98 | 0.92, 1.05 |
Race (ref = non-White) | 0.62 | 0.27, 1.43 |
Sexual Identity (ref = gay/bisexual) | 0.13** | 0.06, 0.27 |
Relationship Status and Concordance (ref = single) | ||
Seroconcordant Partner | 0.84 | 0.42, 1.68 |
Serodiscordant Partner | 0.30* | 0.11, 0.80 |
Viral Load (ref = undetectable) | 1.27 | 0.63, 2.54 |
AUDIT | 1.14* | 1.03, 1.27 |
DAST | 1.15* | 1.04, 1.27 |
Sexual Identity X AUDIT | 0.93 | 0.76, 1.14 |
| ||
Condomless sex vs. Consistent condom use | ||
| ||
Age | 0.99 | 0.91, 1.07 |
Race (ref = non-White) | 1.06 | 0.35, 3.16 |
Sexual Identity (ref = gay/bisexual) | 0.22** | 0.09, 0.53 |
Relationship Status and Concordance (ref = single) | ||
Seroconcordant Partner | 0.94 | 0.40, 2.22 |
Serodiscordant Partner | 0.36 | 0.11, 1.14 |
Viral Load (ref = undetectable) | 1.00 | 0.44, 2.26 |
AUDIT | 0.99 | 0.88, 1.12 |
DAST | 1.10 | 0.98, 1.23 |
Sexual Identity X AUDIT | 1.16 | 0.92, 1.48 |
| ||
Consistent condom use vs. No sex | ||
| ||
Age | 1.00 | 0.94, 1.06 |
Race (ref = non-White) | 0.63 | 0.26, 1.52 |
Sexual Identity (ref = gay/bisexual) | 0.55* | 0.30, 1.00 |
Relationship Status and Concordance (ref = single) | ||
Seroconcordant Partner | 0.77 | 0.38, 1.56 |
Serodiscordant Partner | 0.82 | 0.39, 1.72 |
Viral Load (ref = undetectable) | 1.23 | 0.63, 2.39 |
AUDIT | 1.15* | 1.02, 1.29 |
DAST | 1.05 | 0.96, 1.15 |
Sexual Identity X AUDIT | 0.80* | 0.67, 0.94 |
p <.05;
p ≤.01