Callie Kluitenberg Harris, Horng-Shiuann Wu, Rebecca Lehto, Gwen Wyatt, Barbara Given
{"title":"Relationships Among Determinants of Health, Cancer Screening Participation, and Sexual Minority Identity: A Systematic Review.","authors":"Callie Kluitenberg Harris, Horng-Shiuann Wu, Rebecca Lehto, Gwen Wyatt, Barbara Given","doi":"10.1089/lgbt.2023.0097","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b><i>Purpose:</i></b> To address cancer screening disparities and reduce cancer risk among sexual minority (SM) groups, this review identifies individual, interpersonal, and community/societal determinants of cancer screening (non)participation among differing SM identities. <b><i>Methods:</i></b> Seven scientific databases were searched. Inclusion criteria were as follows: (1) used quantitative methods; (2) English language; (3) cancer screening focus; and (4) at least one SM group identified. Articles were excluded if: (1) analysis was not disaggregated by SM identity (<i>n</i> = 29) and (2) quantitative analysis excluded determinants of cancer screening (<i>n</i> = 19). The Sexual and Gender Minority Health Disparities Research Framework guided literature synthesis. <b><i>Results:</i></b> Twelve studies addressed cervical (<i>n</i> = 4), breast (<i>n</i> = 3), breast/cervical (<i>n</i> = 3), or multiple cancers (<i>n</i> = 2). Other cancers were excluded due to inclusion/exclusion criteria. The total sample was 20,622 (mean 1525), including lesbian (<i>n</i> = 13,409), bisexual (<i>n</i> = 4442), gay (<i>n</i> = 1386), mostly heterosexual (<i>n</i> = 1302), and queer (<i>n</i> = 83) identities. Studies analyzing individual-level determinants (<i>n</i> = 8) found that socioeconomic status affected cervical, but not breast, cancer screening among lesbian and bisexual participants (<i>n</i> = 2). At the interpersonal level (<i>n</i> = 7), provider-patient relationship was a determinant of cervical cancer screening among lesbian participants (<i>n</i> = 4); a relationship not studied for other groups. Studies analyzing community/societal determinants (<i>n</i> = 5) found that rurality potentially affected cervical cancer screening among lesbian, but not bisexual people (<i>n</i> = 3). <b><i>Conclusions:</i></b> This review identified socioeconomic status, provider-patient relationship, and rurality as determinants affecting cancer screening among SM people. While literature addresses diverse SM groups, inclusion/exclusion criteria identified studies addressing cisgender women. Addressing disparities in the identified determinants of cervical cancer screening may improve participation among SM women. Further research is needed to understand determinants of cancer screening unique to other SM groups.</p>","PeriodicalId":18062,"journal":{"name":"LGBT health","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"LGBT health","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1089/lgbt.2023.0097","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Purpose: To address cancer screening disparities and reduce cancer risk among sexual minority (SM) groups, this review identifies individual, interpersonal, and community/societal determinants of cancer screening (non)participation among differing SM identities. Methods: Seven scientific databases were searched. Inclusion criteria were as follows: (1) used quantitative methods; (2) English language; (3) cancer screening focus; and (4) at least one SM group identified. Articles were excluded if: (1) analysis was not disaggregated by SM identity (n = 29) and (2) quantitative analysis excluded determinants of cancer screening (n = 19). The Sexual and Gender Minority Health Disparities Research Framework guided literature synthesis. Results: Twelve studies addressed cervical (n = 4), breast (n = 3), breast/cervical (n = 3), or multiple cancers (n = 2). Other cancers were excluded due to inclusion/exclusion criteria. The total sample was 20,622 (mean 1525), including lesbian (n = 13,409), bisexual (n = 4442), gay (n = 1386), mostly heterosexual (n = 1302), and queer (n = 83) identities. Studies analyzing individual-level determinants (n = 8) found that socioeconomic status affected cervical, but not breast, cancer screening among lesbian and bisexual participants (n = 2). At the interpersonal level (n = 7), provider-patient relationship was a determinant of cervical cancer screening among lesbian participants (n = 4); a relationship not studied for other groups. Studies analyzing community/societal determinants (n = 5) found that rurality potentially affected cervical cancer screening among lesbian, but not bisexual people (n = 3). Conclusions: This review identified socioeconomic status, provider-patient relationship, and rurality as determinants affecting cancer screening among SM people. While literature addresses diverse SM groups, inclusion/exclusion criteria identified studies addressing cisgender women. Addressing disparities in the identified determinants of cervical cancer screening may improve participation among SM women. Further research is needed to understand determinants of cancer screening unique to other SM groups.
LGBT healthPUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH -
CiteScore
6.60
自引率
6.20%
发文量
80
期刊介绍:
LGBT Health is the premier peer-reviewed journal dedicated to promoting optimal healthcare for millions of sexual and gender minority persons worldwide by focusing specifically on health while maintaining sufficient breadth to encompass the full range of relevant biopsychosocial and health policy issues. This Journal aims to promote greater awareness of the health concerns particular to each sexual minority population, and to improve availability and delivery of culturally appropriate healthcare services. LGBT Health also encourages further research and increased funding in this critical but currently underserved domain. The Journal provides a much-needed authoritative source and international forum in all areas pertinent to LGBT health and healthcare services. Contributions from all continents are solicited including Asia and Africa which are currently underrepresented in sex research.