Back

Trends in, and factors associated with, chemsex in a community sample of gay, bisexual, and other men who have sex with men in England, 2022-2025

Yuan, J.-M.; Viviani, L.; Mullen, D.; Ogaz, D.; Mohammed, H.

2026-10-21 sexual and reproductive health
10.64898/2026.10.19.26365930 medRxiv
Show abstract

Background Chemsex, drug use before/during sex to facilitate and enhance the experience, is undertaken by a minority of gay, bisexual and other men who have sex with men (GBMSM), but evidence of chemsex prevalence in England is limited. This study describes trends in chemsex prevalence between 2022-2025 and identifies factors associated with chemsex amongst GBMSM in England. Methods Data from the RiiSH study (2022-2025), an annual online cross-sectional survey of GBMSM recruited through social networking/dating apps and community partners, were analysed. Trends in chemsex prevalence and adjusted prevalence were estimated using log-binomial regression models. The following seven variables were candidate factors associated with chemsex and were assessed through logistic regression: age, sexual orientation, education, employment, HIV status, HIV PrEP use, and sexual health service (SHS) use. Results 5728 GBMSM were included in this study. Adjusted chemsex prevalence varied from 6.1% in 2022 to 4.2% in 2023, 5.1% in 2024 and 6.8% in 2025. Chemsex was more likely in GBMSM who were: gay (aOR=1.57 versus other sexual orientations; 95%CI 1.11-2.29, p=0.01), unemployed (aOR=3.08 versus employed full-time; 95%CI 2.19-4.26, p<0.001); aged 35-59 versus 16-34 years (p<0.001), with recent HIV PrEP use (aOR=3.79 versus no recent use; 95%CI 2.63-5.56, p<0.001), SHS use (aOR=2.23 versus no recent use; 95%CI 1.76-2.83, p<0.001), and living with HIV (aOR=3.16 versus negative/unknown HIV status; 95%CI 2.43-4.09, p<0.001). Conclusions Chemsex prevalence was low and stable between 2022-2025. PrEP and SHS use were associated with chemsex, supporting integration of specialist support services within SHS.

Matching journals

The top 3 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.