Table 2 Crude and adjusted logistic regression models for the association between recruitment type and testing HIV positive at a community-based organization in Lima, Peru, 2012–2013
Characteristic/Behavior | Crude | Adjusted | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
ORa | (95 % CI) | OR | (95 % CI) | OR | (95 % CI) | |
In person | Ref | Ref | Ref | |||
Online | 1.60 | (1.20, 2.13) | 1.58 | (1.18, 2.13) | 1.61 | (1.19, 2.18) |
Sex Worker | 1.27 | (0.80, 2.00) | 1.12 | (0.68, 1.84) | 1.12 | (0.68, 1.86) |
Age | 1.01 | (0.99, 1.02) | 1.01 | (0.99, 1.03) | 1.01 | (0.99, 1.03) |
Any previous HIV testb | 0.70 | (0.52, 0.93) | 0.62 | (0.45, 0.84) | 0.62 | (0.45, 0.85) |
Sexual Role in past 6 months | ||||||
Penetrative | Ref | Ref | Ref | |||
Both receptive and penetrative | 2.13 | (1.44, 3.14) | 2.08 | (1.40, 3.08) | 2.09 | (1.40, 3.10) |
Receptive | 1.78 | (1.14, 2.78) | 1.67 | (1.06, 2.63) | 1.66 | (1.05, 2.62) |
No sex | 1.42 | (0.46, 4.33) | 1.31 | (0.43, 4.04) | 1.34 | (0.43, 4.14) |
Consistency of condom use in past 3 monthsc | ||||||
100 % condom use | Ref | Ref | Ref | |||
50–99 % condom use | 1.09 | (0.77, 1.55) | 1.09 | (0.75, 1.58) | 1.09 | (0.75, 1.59) |
1–49 % condom use | 1.07 | (0.74, 1.55) | 1.00 | (0.68, 1.46) | 0.96 | (0.66, 1.41) |
Never used condom | 1.05 | (0.71, 1.55) | 0.97 | (0.65, 1.46) | 0.95 | (0.63, 1.43) |
Alcohol/drug use during sex in past 3 months | 1.13 | (0.86, 1.49) | 1.16 | (0.87, 1.55) | 1.18 | (0.89, 1.57) |
Sex partner had STI in past 3 months | 1.24 | (0.84, 1.82) | 1.27 | (0.85, 1.91) | 1.25 | (0.83, 1.88) |
Looked up STI information online in past 3 months | 0.97 | (0.73, 1.29) | 0.68 | (0.42, 1.08) | ||
Used the internet to look for sex in past 3 months | 1.16 | (0.88, 1.51) | 1.09 | (0.80, 1.50) | ||
Sex with partner met on the internet in past 3 months | 1.09 | (0.82, 1.46) | 1.28 | (0.80, 2.06) | ||