Correction to: AIDS and Behavior https://doi.org/10.1007/s10461-022-03690-w

The original version of this article unfortunately did not remove blinding from the manuscript prior to publication the error has been corrected with this erratum. Changes are below.

Abstract

Adverse childhood experiences (ACEs) are a well-documented HIV-risk factor, but less is known about the relationship between ACEs and different HIV testing strategies. This study used data from an LGBTQ + community health assessment, that was part of a multi-staged community-based participatory research project in San Antonio, Texas. Overall, 464 young men who have sex with men (YMSM; < 36-years-old) completed an online, cross-sectional survey that included questions about ACEs and HIV testing behavior. An association between increased ACEs exposure and the odds of clinic-based testing and HIVST HIV significantly decreased relative to never testing for HIV. Additionally, greater ACEs exposure was significantly associated with increased odds of reporting community-based testing (AOR = 1.09, 95% CI = 1.00, 1.20) and significantly reduced odds of HIV self-testing (AOR = 0.72, 95% CI = 0.63, 0.82) compared to clinic-based testing. Cumulative ACEs exposure is important in understanding HIV testing behaviors in YMSM and should be considered when developing HIV testing programs.

Recruitment and Data Collection

Data from this paper come from a larger, multistage project called Strengthening Colors of Pride (SCoP) focused on understanding childhood adversity, resilience, and health in sexual and gender minority people living in South Texas, primarily in living in Bexar County [23–25, 39, 40]. SCoP is grounded in the principles of community-based participatory research (CBPR) [41, 42] incorporating input from a community advisory board (CAB) regarding all aspects of the study. We used a multimodal recruitment strategy that included distribution of palm cards containing brief study information, inclusion criteria, and a link to an online survey, as well as a QR code. Palm cards were distributed at LGBTQ + specific community events during the summer of 2019. Email addresses and consent to be contacted at a later date about completing the online survey were also collected during the annual San Antonio Pride Festival and an email blast was sent out from The Pride Center which serves LGBTQ + individuals living in and surrounding counties. Recruitment was also done via social media (e.g., Facebook, Twitter, Instagram) and other websites (e.g., The Pride Center, CAB member organizations websites), as well as through the social and professional networks of the CAB. All study procedures were approved by Institutional Review Board.

This paper reports on data collected using an online survey. Participants who visited the study website were provided with additional information about SCoP. Respondents who clicked on the link to the survey were taken to study information sheet (n = 2821). After reading the study information sheet, respondents provided consent to participate and were taken to the online survey (n = 2798. 99.9%). Of those consenting 187 (6.7%) did not start the survey and 459 (17.6%) did not meet inclusion criteria for the study. While individuals under 18 were included in the original data collection (n = 166, 7.7%), they are excluded in this analysis because the ACEs they report may be ongoing and would be considered recent rather than past adverse experiences. In total, 464 (23.5%) of respondents met eligibility for inclusion in this analysis: assigned male at birth, identified as cisgender men, were between the ages of 18–35 years old, reported sex with men or men and women during the past year, where HIV negative, and responded to all relevant questions. The survey took, on average, 30-min to complete and participants were provided a $10 electronic Amazon Gift Card for their time.

Demographic Characteristics Participants were asked to select their age from a drop-down menu ranging from 18 to 100-years-old. Individuals were asked to indicate their sexual orientation: response options included gay, bisexual, pansexual, same-gender loving, asexual, queer, heterosexual, and heteroflexible. Orientation was recoded to compare mono-sexual orientation (i.e., gay or same-gender loving, heterosexual) to not mono-sexual orientation (i.e., bisexual, pansexual, heterosexual and queer). Respondents were asked to self-identify their race (i.e., African American/Black, Asian Pacific Islander, Native American/Alaskan Native, White) and whether they identified as Hispanic/Latino/Latina/Latinx (Hispanic/Latinx). Respondents were given the option of selecting multiple racial identities. Race/ethnicity was coded with three levels (1 = White, not Hispanic/Latinx, 2 = Hispanic/Latinx any race, 3 = person of color, not Hispanic/Latinx). Participants were asked to report the highest level of education attainment. Responses were recoded so that 0 = less than a 4-year college degree and 1 = at least a 4-year degree. Participants were asked to select from 8 annual income categories ranging from 0 = $0–$10,000/year to more than $100,000/year. Responses were recoded so that 0 = less than $50,000/year and 1 = at least $50,000/year. This cut point was determined on the basis of annual median income of Bexar County. Participants were asked who they have sex within the past year (1 = men only, 2 = women only, 3 = both men and women). Individuals reporting not having sex or having sex with only women in the past year were excluded from this analysis. We also asked participants to report what Texas County they currently lived in and recoded this variable to reflect if they lived in a Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA) designated rural county (1 = yes) or not (0 = no).

The original article has been corrected.