ライフサイエンスコーパス: risk behaviour

1 ith HIV despite significantly lower rates of risk behaviour.

2 ased treatments are available to reduce this risk behaviour.

3 e used to infer changes in HIV-incidence and risk behaviour.

4 couples was associated with increased sexual risk behaviour.

5 selling and testing did not adversely affect risk behaviour.

6 y for HIV prevention caused increased sexual risk behaviour.

7 eduction programmes concentrate on injection-risk behaviour.

8 substantially more complete reporting of HIV risk behaviour.

9 s, brought about population-level changes in risk behaviour.

10 n reduce the risk of death from overdose and risk behaviours.

11 No significant effects were shown for other risk behaviours.

12 rs can reduce HIV incidence through reducing risk behaviours.

13 of amphetamine-group substance use or sexual risk behaviours.

14 prevention of relapse, and reduction of HIV risk behaviours.

15 husbands of the married women to study male risk behaviours.

16 ircumcision could simply be a marker for low-risk behaviours.

17 of the impact of prevention interventions on risk behaviours.

18 ry outcomes, the intervention reduced autism-risk behaviours (0.50, CI -0.15 to 1.08), increased pare

19 or HIV after adjustment for women's own high-risk behaviours, although these are known to be associat

20 a method of reducing under-reporting of HIV risk behaviour among injecting drug users.

21 PV, and various health conditions and sexual risk behaviours among MSM.

22 Factors most strongly associated with risk behaviour and adverse outcomes have considerable po

23 HIV diagnosis, risk behaviour and self-reported STIs were compared amon

24 methadone upon incarceration on individuals' risk behaviours and engagement with post-release treatme

25 More respondents reported HIV risk behaviours and other sensitive behaviours in audio-

26 incidence, increase HIV testing, reduce HIV risk behaviour, and change social and behavioural norms.

27 Africa, and high rates of HIV infection, HIV risk behaviour, and evidence of behavioural links betwee

28 s depends on whether treated patients change risk behaviour, and on treatment coverage: higher covera

29 led in a cohort study compares demographics, risk behaviour, and sexually transmitted infections (STI

30 RT) on viraemia and immune responses, sexual risk behaviour, and the effect of the socioeconomic inte

31 High HIV burden, risk behaviours, and low use of combination HIV preventi

32 with those who maintained low-risk or medium-risk behaviour as a time-varying covariate, and the inte

33 to show a clinically meaningful reduction in risk behaviour associated with commanding voices.

34 e demographic characteristics, drug use, and risk behaviours associated with participants' uptake of

35 Differences in risk behaviour at baseline or during the study, or annua

36 ut 9187 (58.2%) participants reported higher-risk behaviour at least once during the study.

37 atios for the difference in reporting of HIV risk behaviours between interview methods.

38 This change is unlikely to be due to sexual risk behaviours, but might be attributable to hormonal c

39 We compared sexual risk behaviour by counselling strategy with a 6.5% non-i

40 Population-level of risk behaviour decreased significantly in the interventi

41 ated the association between demographic and risk behaviour during screening and subsequent seroconve

42 mographic characteristics, drug use, and HIV risk behaviours for 30 days preceding the interview.

43 ting the odds of health conditions or sexual risk behaviours for MSM experiencing or perpetrating IPV

44 mia (12% [12/98]), even after accounting for risk behaviour (hazard ratio, 0.45; 95% CI 0.23-0.88).

45 needs on how to question men about specific risk behaviours, improved strategies for negotiating ris

46 athway of the intervention, that of changing risk behaviours in female sex workers and high-risk men

47 ce, male dominance in relationships, and HIV risk behaviours in men, as well as effective interventio

48 Sexual Relationship Power Scale (SRPS), and risk behaviours including multiple, concurrent, and casu

49 and current relationship status and women's risk behaviour, intimate partner violence (odds ratio 1.

50 s of behaviour change to peers, decreases in risk behaviour may be possible.

51 c individual and dyadic-level prevention and risk behaviours, network attributes, and care patterns.

52 y used to study mental health conditions and risk behaviours on a large scale.

53 fferent population groups according to their risk behaviours or their location.

54 of heroin abstinence, and reductions in HIV risk behaviours over 6 months.

55 nsers in intervention-city bars corroborated risk-behaviour self-reports.

56 graphic location, "key populations" based on risk behaviours (sex work, injecting drug use, and male-

57 model, and we calculated the PAF and NNT for risk behaviour subgroups.

58 e first 12-18 months, and similar effects on risk behaviours suggest that prevention of HIV infection

59 ns need to consider the links between sexual risk behaviour, testing, and potential PrEP use.

60 creases in HIV testing and reductions in HIV risk behaviour, to recommend the Project Accept approach

61 of the nucleus accumbens dynamically altered risk behaviour, transiently shifting the psychometric fu

62 -treat population (16,395 participants), HIV risk behaviour was assessed with a self-administered que

63 No overall effect on sexual risk behaviour was recorded.

64 ssing race-specific reporting differences in risk behaviour was the only one to yield a prevalence in

65 Participant demographics, drug use, and risk behaviours were assessed at baseline and every 3 mo

66 Self-reported risk behaviours were significantly higher in men than in

67 HIV risk behaviours were significantly reduced from baseline

68 it is associated with reducing drug and sex risk behaviours, which were primary aims.

69 people who most frequently engage in sexual risk behaviour while travelling abroad would be useful f