Table 3.

Analysis of Centrality Indicators for Nondisclosed MSM and MSM in Guangzhou, China

	All clusters			Restricted to clusters of size n ≥ 3			Restricted to clusters of size n ≥ 3 and equal number of casesb
Indicatorsa	Nondisclosed MSM (n = 61)	MSM (n = 254)	P Value	Nondisclosed MSM (n = 43)	MSM (n = 236)	P Value	Nondisclosed MSM (n = 43)	MSM (n = 43)	P Value
Average shortest path length	1.0 (1.0–2.0)	2.0 (1.2–3.2)	<.001	1.6 (1.0–2.3)	2.2 (1.3–3.3)	.001	1.6 (1.0–2.3)	1.8 (1.2–2.5)	.046
Closeness centrality	1.0 (0.5–1.0)	0.5 (0.3–0.8)	<.001	0.6 (0.4–1.0)	0.5 (0.3–0.8)	.001	0.64 (0.4–1.0)	0.56 (0.4–0.8)	.035
Degree	2.0 (1.0–5.5)	3.0 (2.0–7.0)	.008	3.0 (2.0–9.0)	4.0 (2.0–7.0)	.715	3.0 (2.0–9.0)	2.0 (2.0–5.0)	.069
Radiality	1.0 (0.8–1.0)	0.8 (0.6–0.9)	<.001	0.79 (0.72–1.00)	0.73 (0.62–0.88)	.002	0.79 (0.72–1.00)	0.75 (0.6–0.9)	.020

Abbreviation: MSM, men who have sex with men.

^aData are median (IQR) for the abnormal distribution of indicators. Statistical significance was calculated using a Mann-Whitney test.

^bAnalysis for equal number of nondisclosed MSM and MSM using Wilcoxon signed rank test.