The University of Southampton
University of Southampton Institutional Repository

Evaluation of the condom barriers scale for young black men who have sex with men: reliability and validity of 3 subscales

Evaluation of the condom barriers scale for young black men who have sex with men: reliability and validity of 3 subscales
Evaluation of the condom barriers scale for young black men who have sex with men: reliability and validity of 3 subscales
Background: Reliable and valid scale measures of barriers to condom use are not available for young black men who have sex with men (YBMSM). The purpose of this study was to evaluate the Condom Barriers Scales for application with YBMSM.

Methods: A clinic-based sample of 600 YBMSM completed a computer-assisted self-interview. The primary measure was a 14-item abbreviated version of the Condom Barriers Scale. Reliability and criterion validity were assessed.

Results: All 3 subscales were reliable: partner-related barriers (Cronbach [alpha]=0.73), sensation-related barriers ([alpha]=0.70), and motivation-related barriers ([alpha] =0.81). A complete absence of barriers was common: 47.0% (partner-related), 30.7% (sensation-related), and 46.5% (motivation-related). Dichotomized subscales were significantly associated with reporting any condomless insertive anal sex (all Ps < 0.001) and any condomless receptive anal sex (all Ps < 0.001). The subscales were significantly associated with these measures of condomless sex preserved at a continuous level (all Ps <0.001, except for sensation barriers associated with condomless receptive anal sex = 0.03). Further, the subscales were significantly associated with reporting any condom use problems (all Ps <0.001) and a measure of condomless oral sex (all Ps <0.001, except for partner-related barriers=0.31). Finally, the sensation-related barriers subscale was significantly associated with testing positive for Chlamydia and/or gonorrhea (P=0.049).

Conclusions: The 3 identified subscales yielded adequate reliability and strong evidence of validity, thereby suggesting the utility of these brief measures for use in observational and experimental research with YBMSM.
0148-5717
Crosby, Richard
2801f68b-3b83-422a-9687-9bade8502cf9
Sanders, Stephanie A.
bb4ce9a1-0d94-4fe9-9113-f2ac41ec7961
Graham, Cynthia
ac400331-f231-4449-a69b-ec9a477224c8
Milhausen, Robin
d6e78d8f-c05a-4c64-a8f7-5b7204ccc12b
Yarber, William L.
2bf2b5cc-004a-4c27-9e88-039b532e22cf
Mena, Leandro
c634a83a-f6eb-40e7-8871-8b006237d6b9
Crosby, Richard
2801f68b-3b83-422a-9687-9bade8502cf9
Sanders, Stephanie A.
bb4ce9a1-0d94-4fe9-9113-f2ac41ec7961
Graham, Cynthia
ac400331-f231-4449-a69b-ec9a477224c8
Milhausen, Robin
d6e78d8f-c05a-4c64-a8f7-5b7204ccc12b
Yarber, William L.
2bf2b5cc-004a-4c27-9e88-039b532e22cf
Mena, Leandro
c634a83a-f6eb-40e7-8871-8b006237d6b9

Crosby, Richard, Sanders, Stephanie A., Graham, Cynthia, Milhausen, Robin, Yarber, William L. and Mena, Leandro (2016) Evaluation of the condom barriers scale for young black men who have sex with men: reliability and validity of 3 subscales. Sexually Transmitted Diseases. (doi:10.1097/OLQ.0000000000000562).

Record type: Article

Abstract

Background: Reliable and valid scale measures of barriers to condom use are not available for young black men who have sex with men (YBMSM). The purpose of this study was to evaluate the Condom Barriers Scales for application with YBMSM.

Methods: A clinic-based sample of 600 YBMSM completed a computer-assisted self-interview. The primary measure was a 14-item abbreviated version of the Condom Barriers Scale. Reliability and criterion validity were assessed.

Results: All 3 subscales were reliable: partner-related barriers (Cronbach [alpha]=0.73), sensation-related barriers ([alpha]=0.70), and motivation-related barriers ([alpha] =0.81). A complete absence of barriers was common: 47.0% (partner-related), 30.7% (sensation-related), and 46.5% (motivation-related). Dichotomized subscales were significantly associated with reporting any condomless insertive anal sex (all Ps < 0.001) and any condomless receptive anal sex (all Ps < 0.001). The subscales were significantly associated with these measures of condomless sex preserved at a continuous level (all Ps <0.001, except for sensation barriers associated with condomless receptive anal sex = 0.03). Further, the subscales were significantly associated with reporting any condom use problems (all Ps <0.001) and a measure of condomless oral sex (all Ps <0.001, except for partner-related barriers=0.31). Finally, the sensation-related barriers subscale was significantly associated with testing positive for Chlamydia and/or gonorrhea (P=0.049).

Conclusions: The 3 identified subscales yielded adequate reliability and strong evidence of validity, thereby suggesting the utility of these brief measures for use in observational and experimental research with YBMSM.

Text
Crosby barrier BSL CBS Final accepted.doc - Accepted Manuscript
Download (81kB)

More information

Accepted/In Press date: 19 October 2016
e-pub ahead of print date: 27 December 2016
Organisations: Psychology

Identifiers

Local EPrints ID: 404463
URI: http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/id/eprint/404463
ISSN: 0148-5717
PURE UUID: 6c9c65da-cdc5-4233-a441-310a07f7b05e
ORCID for Cynthia Graham: ORCID iD orcid.org/0000-0002-7884-599X

Catalogue record

Date deposited: 16 Jan 2017 14:43
Last modified: 21 Mar 2024 05:01

Export record

Altmetrics

Contributors

Author: Richard Crosby
Author: Stephanie A. Sanders
Author: Cynthia Graham ORCID iD
Author: Robin Milhausen
Author: William L. Yarber
Author: Leandro Mena

Download statistics

Downloads from ePrints over the past year. Other digital versions may also be available to download e.g. from the publisher's website.

View more statistics

Atom RSS 1.0 RSS 2.0

Contact ePrints Soton: eprints@soton.ac.uk

ePrints Soton supports OAI 2.0 with a base URL of http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/cgi/oai2

This repository has been built using EPrints software, developed at the University of Southampton, but available to everyone to use.

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you continue without changing your settings, we will assume that you are happy to receive cookies on the University of Southampton website.

×