Concurrency had been observed employing the modified UNAIDS point prevalence measures.A total of . of participants reported concurrent partnerships at months before interview, and . did so at months beforehand.Similarly, the agreements in between these measures plus the partnershiptiming module have been lowest (��.and .at and months, respectively).In addition, the modified UNAIDS measures had higher agreement with one particular an additional (.agreement, ��).To assess the degree to which the usage of monthlevel dates with the exclusion of ties could possibly have diminished the UNAIDS measure estimates, we calculated these point prevalences applying day resolution date details and found prevalences of . and . at and months, respectively.Table displays these same metrics for those participants who reported sex partner.Among these participants, the prevalence of concurrency as measured by the partnershiptiming module was ..As anticipated, this restriction also triggered all other prevalence measures to improve (variety direct query .UNAIDS months) and their agreement with all the partnershiptiming module to lower (�� range direct question .UNAIDS months).For this subgroup, the agreement amongst the direct query plus the tieinclusive overlapping dates methods were fair (��), equivalent to that reported amongst US heterosexuals (��) and higher than that amongst Malawian heterosexuals (�ʡ�) .A further restriction to participants with exclusively repeat partners is shown in Table .A . concurrency prevalence was observed applying the partnershiptiming module.Higher and comparable levels of agreement had been observed for the direct question and date overlap Finafloxacin Cancer strategies in comparison with the partnershiptiming module (agreement range . �� range .).Despite higher agreement, very low matched OR were noticed for the direct question (matched OR CI .) and tieinclusive date overlap approaches (matched OR CI .).In contrast, poor agreement was noticed involving the UNAIDS and partnershiptiming module measures (agreement .and , �� range .and .for and months, respectively).The measurement of concurrency at every single method��s principal unit of measurement is shown in Table .Participants indicated concurrent partners throughout . of partnerships involving repeat partners making use of the partnershiptiming module.Working with the direct question module, this was . having a substantial amount of agreement ( ��).Discordantly classified partners have been times as most likely to be considered concurrent by the direct query process (matched OR CI .).Amongst triads involving repeat partners, . of those involving repeat partners were concurrent.Agreement was consistent and moderate with the overlapping dates measures (agreement range . �� variety .).By the tieinclusive overlapping dates technique, triadic concurrency prevalence was higher PubMed ID:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21331628 , with high tendency to classify discrepant triads as concurrent in comparison with the partnershiptiming module (matched OR CI .).For the set of participants with many partners considered in Table , we examined individuallevel correlates of agreement with all the partnershiptiming module (Table).Agreement in classifying concurrency between every single with the alternative strategies along with the partnershiptiming module did not drastically differ by raceethnicity, age, or annual earnings (kappa values not considerably distinctive).Agreement drastically differed by education level for the day resolution and month resolution, excluding ties approaches, with these reporting some college education having the highest agreement.DiscussionIn this comparison of extant.