AIDS and Behavior

, Volume 21, Issue 12, pp 3578–3589 | Cite as

Network Centrality and Geographical Concentration of Social and Service Venues that Serve Young Men Who Have Sex with Men

  • Kayo Fujimoto
  • Rolf Turner
  • Lisa M. Kuhns
  • Ju Yeong Kim
  • Jing Zhao
  • John A. Schneider
Original Paper

Abstract

This study examines network centrality of inter-venue networks formed by collaboration, competition, and sponsorship relationships among venues that serve young men who have sex with men (MSM) aged 16–29 years in relation to their geographical concentrations in Chicago, Illinois, and Houston, Texas. Our data on the physical venues comprised 116 venues in Chicago and 102 venues in Houston. We examined the relationship between the network centrality of different relations and the geographical intensity among these venues, and considered neighborhood-level socioeconomic determinants of health. The results indicate that young MSM-serving social and service venues found in close physical proximity to one another tend to have large centrality indegree values based on competition in both cities, and based on collaboration only in Chicago. No evidence, however, was found that occupying a central position in the sponsorship networks was related to geographic concentration. Combined, these results suggest that HIV prevention interventions should consider the organizing force for competition. Such a strategy could result in better services. However there may still be potential for overlap and redundancy in services at the expense of under-served regions where proven interventions could have the greatest impact.

Keywords

Social capital Young MSM HIV Social network analysis Spatial clustering Gay neighborhood 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This study was supported by the National Institutes of Health/NIMH 1R01MH100021, 1R01DA039934. The content is the sole responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Institutes of Health. The authors acknowledge Robert Garofalo, Dennis Li, and YMAP staff for their contributions to this study.

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

Research involved human participants and informed consent was obtained. All study procedures were approved by the Committees for the Protection of Human Subjects at the University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston, the University of Chicago, and the Ann & Robert H. Lurie Children’s Hospital of Chicago.

References

  1. 1.
    Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). CDC fact sheet: HIV among gay and bisexual men: National Center for HIV/AIDS, Viral Hepatitis, STD, and TB Prevension, Division of HIV/AIDS Prevention; 2015.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Kelly BC, Carpiano RM, Easterbrook A, Parsons JT. Sex and the community: the implications of neighbourhoods and social networks for sexual risk behaviours among urban gay men. Soc Health Illn. 2012;34(7):1085–102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Carpiano RM, Kelly BC, Easterbrook A, Parsons JT. Community and drug use among gay men: the role of neighborhoods and networks. J Health Soc Behav. 2011;52(1):74–90.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Buttram M, Kurtz SP. Risk and protective factors assocaited with gay neighborhood residence. Am J Mens Health. 2013;7(2):110–8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Egan JE, Frye V, Krutz SP, et al. Migration, neighborhoods, and networks: approaches to understanding how urban environmental conditions affect syndemic adverse health outcomes among gay, bisexual and other men who have sex with men. AIDS Behav. 2011;15(Suppl 1):S35–50.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Dragowski EA, Halkitis PN, Moeller RW, Siconolfi DE. Social and sexual contexts explains sexual risk taking in young gay, bisexual, and other young men who have sex with men, ages 13–29 years. J HIV AIDS Soc Serv. 2013;12:236–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Martinez AN, Mobley LR, Lorvick J, Novak SP, Lopez A, Kral AH. Spatial analysis of HIV positive injection drug users in San Francisco, 1987–2005. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2014;11:3937–55.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Latkin CA, German D, Vlahov D. Neighborhoods and HIV: a social ecological approach to prevention and care. Am Psychol. 2013;68(4):210–24.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Frye V, Nandi V, Egan JE, et al. Sexual orientation- and race-based disrimination and sexual HIV risk behavior among urban MSM. AIDS Behav. 2015;19:257–69.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Phillips GI, Birkett M, Kuhns L, Hatchel T, Garofalo R, Mustanski B. Neighborhood-level associations with HIV infection among young men who have sex with men in Chicago. Arch Sex Behav. 2015;44:1773–86.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Frye V, Koblin B, Chin J, et al. Neighborhood-level correlates of consistent condom use among men who have sex with men: a multi-level analysis. AIDS Behav. 2010;14(4):974–85.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Portes A. Social capital: its origins and applications in modern sociology. Am Rev Sociol. 1998;24:1–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Wohl AR, Galvan FH, Myers HF, et al. Do social support, stress, disclosure and stigma influence retention in HIV care for Latino and African American men wh o have sex with men and women? AIDS Behav. 2011;15:1098–110.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Wong CF, Schrager SM, Holloway IW, Maeyer IH, Kipke MD. Minority stress experiences and psychological well-being: the impact of support from and connection to social netowrks within the Los Angeles house and ball communities. Prev Sci. 2014;15:44–55.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Kapadia F, Siconolfi DE, Barton S, Olivieri B, Lombardo L, Halkitis PN. Social support network characteristics an sexual risk taking among a racially/ethnically diverse sample of young, urban men who have sex with men. AIDS Behav. 2013;17:1819–28.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Schneider JA, Stuart M, Alida B. Family network proportion and HIV risk among Black men who have sex with men. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr. 2012;61(5):627–35.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Schneider JA, Cornwekk B, Ostrow D, Michaels S, Schumm P. Network mixing and network influences most linked to HIV infection and risk behavior in the HIV epidemic among Black men who have sex with men. Am J Public Health. 2013;103(1):E28–36.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Tobin KE, Latkin CA, Curriero FC. An examination of places where African American men who have sex with men (MSM) use drugs/drink alcohol: a focus on social and spatial characteristics. Int J Drug Policy. 2014;25:591–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Fujimoto K, Wang P, Kuhns L, et al. Multiplex competition, collaboration, and funding networks among social and health organizations: towards organization-based HIV interventions for young men who have sex with men. Med Care. 2017;55(2):102–10.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Bourdieu P. The forms of capital. In: Richardson JG, editor. Handbook of theory and research for the sociology of education. New York: Greenwood; 1986. p. 241–58.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Carpiano RM. Toward a neighborhood resouce-based theory of soical capital for health: can Bourdieu and sociology help? Soc Sci Med. 2006;62:165–75.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Carpiano RM. Actual or potential neighborhood resouces for health: What can Broudieu offer for understanding mechanisms linking soical capital to health? In: Kawachi I, Kim D, Subramanian SV, editors. Social capital and health. New York: Springer; 2008. p. 83–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Carpiano RM. Neighborhood social capital and adult health: an empirical test of a Bourdieu-based model. Health Place. 2007;13:639–55.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Laumann EO, Galakiewicz J, Marsden PV. Community structure as interorganizational linkages. Annu Rev Sociol. 1978;4:455–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Emerson R. Power-dependence relatoins. Am Sociol Rev. 1962;27:31–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Astley WG, Sachdeva PS. Structural sources of interorganizational power: a theoretical synthesis. Acad Manag Rev. 1984;9:104–13.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Burt R. Power in a social topology. Soc Sci Res. 1977;6:1–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Hoffman AN, Stearns TM, Shrader CB. Structure, context, and centrality in interorganizational networks. J Bus Res. 1990;20:333–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Dickson-Gomez J, Corbett AM, Bodnar G, Rodriguez K, Guevara CE. Resouces and obstacles to developing and implementing a structural intervention to prevent HIV in San Salvador, El Savador. Soc Sci Med. 2010;70:351–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    ESRI. ArcGIS Desktop: Release 10. Redlands, CA: Environmental Systems Research Institute; 2011.Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    AIDSVu. Emory University, Rollins School of Public Health. Atlanta, GA; 2014.Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Csardi G, Nepusz T. The igraph software package for complex network research: InterJournal, Complex Systems 1695; 2006.Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Freeman LC. Centrality in social networks: conceptual clarification. Soc Netw. 1979;24(4):385–94.Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    UCINET 6 for Windows: Software for Social Network Analysis [computer program]. Version 6: Harvard: Analytic Technologies; 2002.Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Costenbader E, Valente TW. The stability of centrality measures when networks are sampled. Soc Netw. 2003;25:283–307.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Baddeley A, Rubak E, Turner R. Spatial point patterns: methodology and applications with R. New York: CRC Press; 2015.Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Baddeley A, Turner R, Rubak, E. Package ‘spatstat’ Version 1.40-0: Spatial point pattern analysis, model-fitting, simulation, tests. 2014.Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Adams J, Faust K, Lovasi GS. Capturing context: integrating spatial and social network analyses. Soc Netw. 2012;34:1–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Kayo Fujimoto
    • 1
  • Rolf Turner
    • 2
  • Lisa M. Kuhns
    • 3
  • Ju Yeong Kim
    • 1
  • Jing Zhao
    • 1
  • John A. Schneider
    • 4
  1. 1.Department of Health Promotion & Behavioral Sciences, School of Public HealthUniversity of Texas Health Science Center at HoustonHoustonUSA
  2. 2.Department of StatisticsUniversity of AucklandAucklandNew Zealand
  3. 3.Department of PediatricsFeinberg School of Medicine, Northwestern University & Division of Adolescent Medicine, Ann & Robert H. Lurie Children’s HospitalChicagoUSA
  4. 4.Department of Medicine and Public Health Sciences and the Chicago Center for HIV EliminationUniversity of ChicagoChicagoUSA

Personalised recommendations