Skip to main content

Table 4 Univariate and multivariate associations between characteristics of the participant, the partner and partnership, and unprotected anal intercourse, in 1781 partnerships among 577 MSM. Results of random effects modelling. Amsterdam 2008-9

From: Does online dating lead to higher sexual risk behaviour? A cross-sectional study among MSM in Amsterdam, the Netherlands

  

Univariate

Model 1a

Model 2b

Model 3c

 

No. of partnerships with UAI

OR (95 % CI)

aOR (95 % CI)

aOR (95 % CI)

aOR (95 % CI)

 

n/N

    

Dating location

 

P = 0.031

   

 Offline

210/903 (23.3 %)

1

   

 Online

232/878 (26.4 %)

1.36 (1.03–1.81)

   

Self-perceived HIV status participant

 

P < 0.001

   

 HIV-negative

138/1076 (12.8 %)

1

   

 HIV-positive

245/497 (49.3 %)

11.70 (7.40–18.45)

   

 Unaware

59/208 (28.4 %)

3.55 (2.02–6.22)

   

Dating location * HIV status participant

 

P < 0.001

P < 0.001

P < 0.001

P < 0.001

Offline partner * HIV negative participant

69/549 (12.6 %)

1

1

1

1

Offline partner * HIV positive participant

114/246 (46.3 %)

9.67 (5.60–16.71)

7.70 (4.43–13.39)

13.02 (7.05–24.03)

10.14 (5.32–19.30)

Offline partner * HIV unaware participant

27/108 (25.0 %)

2.88 (1.40–5.89)

2.63 (1.26–5.48)

7.02 (3.12–15.79)

4.30 (1.81–10.23)

Online partner * HIV negative participant

69/527 (13.1 %)

1.07 (0.71–1.62)

1.04 (0.69–1.59)

0.93 (0.60–1.43)

0.94 (0.59–1.48)

Online partner * HIV positive participant

131/251 (52.2 %)

15.55 (8.86–27.30)

12.67 (7.20–22.29)

18.65 (10.00–34.80)

16.41 (8.55–31.52)

Online partner * HIV unaware participant

32/100 (32.0 %)

4.73 (2.34–9.57)

4.87 (2.38–9.96)

12.99 (5.86–28.77)

11.00 (4.76–25.33)

Demographics of the participant

     

Age in years categorised

 

P = 0.004

P = 0.219

P =0.230

P = 0.222

  < 25

10/134 (7.5 %)

0.23 (0.08–0.70)

0.45 (0.16–1.22)

0.40 (0.14–1.12)

0.40 (0.13–1.19)

 25–29

57/243 (23.5 %)

1.30 (0.61–2.75)

1.39 (0.70–2.78)

1.29 (0.63–2.64)

1.32 (0.62–2.82)

 30–34

62/309 (20.1 %)

1

1

1

1

 35–39

100/362 (27.6 %)

1.51 (0.77–2.98)

1.37 (0.74–2.55)

1.34 (0.71–2.55)

1.36 (0.69–2.66)

 40–44

98/353 (27.8 %)

1.57 (0.79–3.12)

1.18 (0.63–2.22)

1.06 (0.55–2.05)

0.87 (0.43–1.75)

  ≥ 45

115/380 (30.3 %)

2.09 (1.06–4.11)

1.39 (0.75–2.59)

1.31 (0.67–2.57)

1.16 (0.57–2.35)

Ethnic group

 

P = 0.311

P = 0.151

P = 0.321

P = 0.470

 Dutch

316/1285 (24.6 %)

1

1

1

1

 Western, non-Dutch

45/221 (20.4 %)

0.89 (0.45–1.73)

0.71 (0.39–1.28)

0.76 (0.40–1.42)

0.68 (0.35–1.31)

 Non-western

67/221 (30.3 %)

1.60 (0.83–3.06)

1.49 (0.85–2.63)

1.37 (0.74–2.53)

1.05 (0.55–2.01)

Sexual behaviour of the participant

     

No. of male sex partners in preceding 6 months, categorized

 

P < 0.001

P = 0.255

P = 0.345

P = 0.570

  < 5

62/333 (18.6 %)

1

1

1

1

 5–9

107/528 (20.3 %)

1.34 (0.74–2.43)

1.16 (0.67–2.00)

1.22 (0.69–2.14)

1.11 (0.62–2.01)

 10–24

149/574 (26.0 %)

1.79 (0.99–3.22)

1.27 (0.75–2.18)

1.27 (0.73–.2.20)

1.09 (0.61–1.95)

 25–49

63/211 (30.0 %)

2.27 (1.08–4.76)

1.40 (0.71–2.78)

1.36 (0.67–2.77)

1.18 (0.56–2.48)

  ≥ 50

61/135 (45.2 %)

6.79 (2.86–16.13)

2.48 (1.12–5.50)

2.43 (1.06–5.56)

2.08 (0.86–5.00)

Characteristics of the partnership

     

Age difference (yrs) participant - partner, categorised

 

P = 0.482

 

P = 0.121

P = 0.109

 Partner is >5 years older than participant

72/279 (25.8 %)

1

 

1

1

 Partner & participant differ ≤5 years in age

180/767 (23.5 %)

0.74 (0.45–1.21)

 

0.63 (0.37–1.07)

0.68 (0.39–1.19)

 Partner is >5 years younger than participant

187/723 (25.9 %)

0.79 (0.46–1.35)

 

0.85 (0.47–1.56)

1.01 (0.53–1.92)

Etnic concordance participant - partner

 

P = 0.60

 

P = 0.609

P = 0.320

 Concordant ethnicity

193/767 (25.2 %)

1

 

1

1

 Different ethnicity

249/1014 (24.6 %)

0.96 (0.68–1.34)

 

1.10 (0.76–1.60)

1.22 (0.82–1.81)

Concordance in life styles participant - partner

 

P = 0.115

 

P = 0.023

P = 0.015

 No difference in life styles

186/703 (26.5 %)

1

 

1

1

 Differences in life styles

256/1078 (23.8 %)

0.75 (0.52–1.07)

 

0.66 (0.46–0.95)

0.63 (0.43–0.92)

HIV concordance participant -partner

 

P <0.001

 

P < 0.001

P < 0.001

 Same HIV status

253/789 (32.1 %)

1

 

1

1

 Different HIV status

32/135 (23.7 %)

0.24 (0.12–0.47)

 

0.14 (0.07–0.27)

0.15 (0.08–0.30)

 HIV status unknown of participant or partner

157/857 (18.3 %)

0.29 (0.20–0.43)

 

0.19 (0.12–0.29)

0.25 (0.16–0.40)

Partnership type

 

P = 0.055

  

P = 0.413

 Known partner

289/1137 (25.4 %)

1

  

1

 Anonymous partner

135/589 (22.9 %)

0.70 (0.49–1.01)

  

1.20 (0.77–1.88)

Sex frequency with partnerd

 

P < 0.001

  

P < 0.001

 Once

186/961 (19.4 %)

1

  

1

 2–5 times

167/624 (26.8 %)

1.98 (1.40–2.80)

  

1.74 (1.17–2.58)

 5–10 times

50/129 (38.8 %)

3.58 (1.99–6.45)

  

2.10 (1.09–4.08)

  > 10 times

39/66 (59.1 %)

16.29 (7.07–37.52)

  

10.38 (4.29–25.15)

Group sex with partner

 

P < 0.001

  

P = 0.077

 No

337/1518 (22.2 %)

1

  

1

 Yes

105/262 (40.1 %)

2.54 (1.65–3.89)

  

1.55 (0.95–2.52)

Sex-related substance use in partnership

     

Sex-related use of at least 2 substances other than alcohol

 

P < 0.001

  

P < 0.001

 No

288/1467 (19.6 %)

1

  

1

 Yes

154/313 (49.2 %)

5.37 (3.51–8.21)

  

2.32 (1.44–3.75)

  1. Abbreviations: UAI Unprotected anal intercourse, MSM men who have sex with men, OR odds ratio, aOR adjusted odds ratio
  2. aModel 1 includes, besides dating location, the following co-variates of the participant: age; self-perceived HIV status; and no. of sex partners in preceding 6 months
  3. bModel 2 additionally includes variables concerning the partnership
  4. cModel 3 additionally includes variables concerning sexual behavior in the partnership
  5. dOverlapping categories were stated in the questionnaire
  6. *indicates interaction term