AIDS and Behavior

, Volume 16, Issue 4, pp 807–817 | Cite as

HIV Risk and Substance Use in Men Who Have Sex with Men Surveyed in Bathhouses, Bars/Clubs, and on Venue of Recruitment Matters

  • Christian Grov
Original Paper


There has been little evaluation regarding whether men who have sex with men (MSM) recruited in one type of venue differ in behavioral and demographic characteristics from those recruited in others. We surveyed MSM in gay bars/clubs (n = 199), bathhouses (n = 194), and off (n = 208). Men in bathhouses reported the greatest average number of partners and were less likely to disclose their HIV status. Among men reporting anal sex; those on Craigslist reported the least condom use. Finally, men surveyed in gay bars/clubs were the youngest of the three and the most likely to be single; they also reported the highest levels of attachment to the gay community and the most frequent alcohol use. Our findings demonstrate the need to tailor HIV prevention efforts to the location in which they are targeted, and for researchers to evaluate if participants differ by recruitment source.


Bars Bathhouses Internet MSM Gay and bisexual men Recruitment 


Se ha evaluado poco si los hombres que tienen sexo con hombres (HSH) reclutados en distintos lugares difieren en su comportamiento y demografía. Nosotros encuestamos HSH en bares y clubes gay (n = 199), en casas de baño (n = 194) y en (n = 208). Los hombres encuestados en casas de baño reportaron el promedio más alto de compañeros sexuales, y menor tendencia a revelar su status de VIH. Entre los hombres que reportaron sexo anal, aquellos encuestados en reportaron el menor uso de condones. Finalmente, los hombres encuestados en bares y clubes gay resultaron ser más jóvenes y con mayor tendencia a ser solteros. También reportaron mayor conexión con la comunidad gay y mayor uso de alcohol. Nuestros resultados demuestran la necesidad de adaptar esfuerzos de prevención de VIH a lugares específicos, y que los investigadores analicen si los participantes difieren, dependiendo de dónde fueron reclutados.



The Sex in the City Study was funded by The City University of New York PSC-CUNY Research Award Program (Award # 60016-39 40, PI: Christian Grov), and research activities were conducted with the Center for HIV/AIDS Educational Studies and Training (CHEST). Thanks to Michael D. Smith, Kevin Robin, Bryant Porter, Julia C. Tomassilli, Michael R. Adams, Jeffrey T. Parsons, Sarit A. Golub, Linda Agyemang, Monica Gonzalez, Tyrel Starks, Michael Botsko, the CHEST Recruitment team, and the many Hunter and Brooklyn College students who assisted on the project. Finally, a special thanks to the MSM Workgroup of the NYC HIV Prevention Planning Group for their feedback in developing measures.


  1. 1.
    CDC. Analysis provides new look at disproportionate impact of HIV and syphilis among U.S. gay and bisexual men. Atlanta: US Department of Health and Human Services; 2010. Accessed 15 Mar 2010.
  2. 2.
    CDC. Subpopulation estimates from the HIV incidence surveillance system—United States, 2006. MMWR. 2008;57(36):985–9.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Stall R, Duran L, Wisniewski SR, et al. Running in place: implications of HIV incidence estimates among urban men who have sex with men in the United States and other industrialized countries. AIDS Behav. 2009;13:615–29.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Raymond HF, Bingham T, McFarland W. Locating unrecognized HIV infections among men who have sex with men: San Francisco and Los Angeles. AIDS Educ Prev. 2008;20(5):408–19.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Frankis JS, Flowers P. Public sexual cultures: a systematic review of qualitative research investigating men’s sexual behaviors with men in public spaces. J Homosex. 2009;56(7):861–93.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Woods WJ, Euren J, Pollack LM, Binson D. HIV prevention in gay bathhouses and sex clubs across the United States. JAIDS. 2010;55:s88–90.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Reidy WJ, Spielberg F, Wood R, Binson D, Woods WJ, Goldbaum GM. HIV risk associated with gay bathhouses and sex clubs: findings from 2 Seattle surveys of factors related to HIV and sexually transmitted infections. Am J Public Health. 2009;99(Suppl 1):S165–72.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Thiede H, Jenkins RA, Carey JW, et al. Determinants of recent HIV infection among Seattle-area men who have sex with men. Am J Public Health. 2009;99(S1):S157–64.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Binson D, Woods WJ, Pollack L, Paul J, Stall R, Catania JA. Differential HIV risk in bathhouses and public cruising areas. Am J Public Health. 2001;91(9):1482–6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Liau A, Millett G, Marks G. Meta-analytic examination of online sex-seeking and sexual risk behavior among men who have sex with men. Sex Transm Dis. 2006;33(9):576–84.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Chiasson MA, Parsons JT, Tesoriero JM, Carballo-Dieguez A, Hirshfield S, Remien RH. HIV behavioral research online. J Urban Health. 2006;83(1):73–85.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Rosser BR, Oakes JM, Horvath KJ, Konstan JA, Danilenko GP, Peterson JL. HIV sexual risk behavior by men who use the Internet to seek sex with men: results of the Men’s INTernet Sex Study-II (MINTS-II). AIDS Behav. 2009;13(3):488–98.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Chiasson MA, Hirshfield S, Rietmeijer C. HIV prevention and care in the digital age. JAIDS. 2010;55:s94–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Richters J. Through a hole in a wall: setting and interaction in sex-on-premises venues. Sexualities. 2007;10(3):275–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Grov C, Parsons JT, Bimbi DS. Sexual risk behavior and venues for meeting sex partners: an intercept survey of gay and bisexual men in LA and NYC. AIDS Behav. 2007;11:915–26.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Horvath KJ, Bowen AM, Williams ML. Virtual and physical venues as contexts for HIV risk among rural men who have sex with men. Health Psychol. 2006;25(2):237–42.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Grov C, Golub SA, Parsons JT. HIV status differences in venues where highly-sexually active gay and bisexual men meet sex partners: results from a pilot study. AIDS Educ Prev. 2010;22:496–508.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Daskalakis D, Silvera R, Bernstein K, et al. Implementation of HIV testing at 2 New York city bathhouses: from pilot to clinical service. Clin Infect Dis. 2009;48(11):1609–16.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Semaan S. Time–space sampling and respondent-driven sampling with hard-to-reach populations. Method Innov Online. 2010;5(2):60–75.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Parsons JT, Grov C, Kelly BC. Comparing the effectiveness of two forms of time–space sampling to identify club drug-using young adults. J Drug Issues. 2008;38:1063–84.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Platt L, Wall M, Rhodes T, et al. Methods to recruit hard-to-reach groups: comparing two chain referral sampling methods of recruiting injecting drug users across nine studies in Russia and Estonia. J Urban Health. 2006;83:39–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Ross MW, Mansson SA, Daneback K, Cooper A, Tikkanen R. Biases in internet sexual health samples: comparison of an internet sexuality survey and a national sexual health survey in Sweden. Soc Sci Med. 2005;61(1):245–52.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Evans AR, Wiggins RD, Mercer CH, Bolding GJ, Elford J. Men who have sex with men in Great Britain: comparison of a self-selected internet sample with a national probability sample. Sex Transm Infect. 2007;83(3):200–5.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    MacKellar D, Valleroy L, Karon J, Lemp G, Janssen R. The Young Men’s Survey: methods for estimating HIV seroprevalence and risk factors among young men who have sex with men. Pub Health Rep. 2006;11:138–44.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Stueve A, O’Donnell L, Duran R, Sandoval A, Blome J. Time-space sampling in minority communities: results with young Latino men who have sex with men. Am J Public Health. 2001;91(6):922–6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Watters JK, Biernacki P. Targeted sampling: options for the study of hidden populations. Soc Problems. 1989;36(4):416–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Grov C. Risky sex- and drug-seeking in a probability sample of men-for-men online bulletin board postings. AIDS Behav. 2010;14:1387–92.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Carpiano RM, Kelly BC, Easterbrook A, Parsons JT. Community and drug use among gay men: the role of neighborhood and networks. J Health Soc Behav. 2011;52:74–90.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Phinney JS, Chavira V. Ethnic identity and self-esteem: an exploratory longitudinal study. J Adolesc. 1992;15(3):271–81.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Roberts RE, Phinney JS, Masse LC, Chen YR, Roberts CR, Romero A. The structure of ethnic identity of young adolescents from diverse ethnocultural groups. J Early Adol. 1999;19:301–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Grov C, Bux DA, Parsons JT, Morgenstern J. Recruiting hard-to-reach drug-using men who have sex with men into an intervention study: lessons learned and implications for applied research. Subst Use Misuse. 2009;44:1855–71.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Bowen AM, Williams ML, Daniel CM, Clayton S. Internet based HIV prevention research targeting rural MSM: feasibility, acceptability, and preliminary efficacy. J Behav Med. 2008;31:463–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Fernandez MI, Varga LM, Perrino T, et al. The Internet as recruitment tool for HIV studies: viable strategy for reaching at-risk Hispanic MSM in Miami? AIDS Care. 2004;16(8):953–63.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Hatfield LA, Ghiselli ME, Jacoby SM, et al. Methods for recruiting men of color who have sex with men in prevention-for-positives interventions. Prev Sci. 2010;11(1):56–66.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Pollock JA, Halkitis PN. Environmental factors in relation to unprotected sexual behavior among gay, bisexual, and other MSM. AIDS Educ Prev. 2009;21(4):340–55.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Golden MR, Stekler J, Hughes JP, Wood RW. HIV serosorting in men who have sex with men: Is it safe? JAIDS. 2008;49(2):212–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Wilson DP, Regan DG, Heymer K-J, Fengyi J, Prestage GP, Grulich AE. Serosorting may increase the risk of HIV acquisition among men who have sex with men. Sex Transm Dis. 2010;37(1):13–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Zablotska IB, Imrie J, Prestage G, et al. Gay men’s current practice of HIV seroconcordant unprotected anal intercourse: Serosorting or seroguessing? AIDS Care. 2009;21(4):501–10.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Horvath KJ, Oakes JM, Rosser BR. Sexual negotiation and HIV serodisclosure among men who have sex with men with their online and offline partners. J Urban Health. 2008;85(5):744–58.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Snowden J, Raymond HF, McFarland W. Prevalence of seroadaptive behaviors of men who have sex with men, San Francisco, 2004. Sex Transm Infect. 2009;85:439–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Elwood WN, Green K, Carter KK. Gentlemen don’t speak: communication norms and condom use in bathhouses. J Appl Comm Res. 2003;31:277–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Golub SA, Tomassilli JC, Parsons JT. Partner serostatus and disclosure stigma: implications for physical and mental health outcomes among HIV-positive adults. AIDS Behav. 2009;13:1233–40.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Moskowitz DA, Seal DW. “GWM Looking for sex—SERIOUS ONLY”: the interplay of sexual ad placement frequency and success on the sexual health of “men seeking men” on Craigslist. J Gay Les Soc Serv. 2010;22:399–412.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Ross MW. Typing, doing, and being: sexuality and the Internet. J Sex Res. 2005;42(4):342–52.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Ross MW, Rosser BRS, Coleman E, Mazin R. Misrepresetnation on the Internet and in real life about sex and HIV: a study of Latino men who have sex with men. Cult Health Sex. 2006;8:133–44.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Zablotska IB, Holt M, Prestage G. Changes in gay men’s participation in gay community life: implications for HIV surveillance and research. AIDS Behav (in press) Mar 19.Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    CDC. HIV among gay, bisexual and other men who have sex with men (MSM). Atlanta: CDC (2010). Accessed 30 Sept 2010.
  48. 48.
    CDC. Trends in HIV/AIDS diagnoses among men who have sex with men—33 States, 2001–2006. MMWR. 2008;57(25):681–6.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Health and Nutrition SciencesBrooklyn College of the City University of New York (CUNY) & The Program in Public Health at the Graduate Center of CUNYBrooklynUSA
  2. 2.Center for HIV/AIDS Educational Studies and Training (CHEST)New YorkUSA

Personalised recommendations