Disparities in Study Inclusion and Breast Cancer Screening Rates Among Transgender People: A Systematic Review

IF 4 3区 医学 Q1 RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING Journal of the American College of Radiology Pub Date : 2024-09-01 DOI:10.1016/j.jacr.2024.04.006
{"title":"Disparities in Study Inclusion and Breast Cancer Screening Rates Among Transgender People: A Systematic Review","authors":"","doi":"10.1016/j.jacr.2024.04.006","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>Breast cancer screening trends of transgender and gender diverse (TGD) people remain largely unknown. This is concerning, as data are necessary to inform recommendations made by clinicians to their patients and by national guidelines to clinicians. The aim of this review is to explore the state of existing research literature and provide a summary report of current breast cancer screening rates in TGD adults.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>All articles were identified using Medical Subject Headings terms. Inclusion criteria were all the following: (1) documents inclusion of at least one participant who identifies as a TGD person; (2) at least one TGD participant with top surgery or currently receiving estrogen-based gender-affirming hormone therapy; (3) results that report rates of breast cancer screening or mammogram referral.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Twelve articles met inclusion criteria, six cross-sectional studies and six retrospective chart reviews. Three studies conducted secondary analysis of the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System national dataset, and nine articles recruited their own sample with number of TGD participants ranging from 30 to 1,822 and number of cisgender women ranging from 242 to 18,275. Three studies found lower rates of screening in transfeminine persons receiving gender-affirming care compared with cisgender women; two studies found lower rates among TGD people compared with cisgender women; and three studies found no differences between the breast cancer screening rates of TGD and cisgender participants.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>Limited studies recruit and report trends in breast cancer screening of TGD people. Those that do include TGD participants have mixed results, but overall TGD people had lower rates of breast cancer screening. More research is needed regarding breast cancer screening of TGD people to inform the development of protocols that ensure equitable access to preventative care.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":49044,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the American College of Radiology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of the American College of Radiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1546144024003636","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

Breast cancer screening trends of transgender and gender diverse (TGD) people remain largely unknown. This is concerning, as data are necessary to inform recommendations made by clinicians to their patients and by national guidelines to clinicians. The aim of this review is to explore the state of existing research literature and provide a summary report of current breast cancer screening rates in TGD adults.

Methods

All articles were identified using Medical Subject Headings terms. Inclusion criteria were all the following: (1) documents inclusion of at least one participant who identifies as a TGD person; (2) at least one TGD participant with top surgery or currently receiving estrogen-based gender-affirming hormone therapy; (3) results that report rates of breast cancer screening or mammogram referral.

Results

Twelve articles met inclusion criteria, six cross-sectional studies and six retrospective chart reviews. Three studies conducted secondary analysis of the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System national dataset, and nine articles recruited their own sample with number of TGD participants ranging from 30 to 1,822 and number of cisgender women ranging from 242 to 18,275. Three studies found lower rates of screening in transfeminine persons receiving gender-affirming care compared with cisgender women; two studies found lower rates among TGD people compared with cisgender women; and three studies found no differences between the breast cancer screening rates of TGD and cisgender participants.

Conclusion

Limited studies recruit and report trends in breast cancer screening of TGD people. Those that do include TGD participants have mixed results, but overall TGD people had lower rates of breast cancer screening. More research is needed regarding breast cancer screening of TGD people to inform the development of protocols that ensure equitable access to preventative care.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
变性人乳腺癌筛查率的研究纳入和筛查率差异:系统回顾。
背景变性人和性别多元化(TGD)人群的乳腺癌筛查趋势在很大程度上仍不为人所知。这是一个令人担忧的问题,因为临床医生向患者提出建议以及国家指南向临床医生提出建议都需要数据作为依据。本综述旨在探讨现有研究文献的现状,并提供一份关于目前变性和性别多元化成年人乳腺癌筛查率的总结报告。纳入标准如下(结果12 篇文章符合纳入标准,其中6 篇为横断面研究,6 篇为回顾性图表综述。三项研究对行为风险因素监测系统的国家数据集进行了二次分析,九篇文章自行招募样本,其中TGD参与者人数从30人到1822人不等,顺性别女性人数从242人到18275人不等。三项研究发现,与顺性别女性相比,接受性别确认护理的变性人的筛查率较低;两项研究发现,与顺性别女性相比,变性人的筛查率较低;三项研究发现,变性人与顺性别参与者的乳腺癌筛查率之间没有差异。纳入 TGD 参与者的研究结果不一,但总体而言,TGD 患者的乳腺癌筛查率较低。需要对 TGD 患者的乳腺癌筛查进行更多的研究,以便为制定确保公平获得预防性护理的方案提供信息。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of the American College of Radiology
Journal of the American College of Radiology RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING-
CiteScore
6.30
自引率
8.90%
发文量
312
审稿时长
34 days
期刊介绍: The official journal of the American College of Radiology, JACR informs its readers of timely, pertinent, and important topics affecting the practice of diagnostic radiologists, interventional radiologists, medical physicists, and radiation oncologists. In so doing, JACR improves their practices and helps optimize their role in the health care system. By providing a forum for informative, well-written articles on health policy, clinical practice, practice management, data science, and education, JACR engages readers in a dialogue that ultimately benefits patient care.
期刊最新文献
ACR Appropriateness Criteria® Nonvariceal Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding: 2024 Update ACR Appropriateness Criteria® Penetrating Torso Trauma ACR Appropriateness Criteria® Pretreatment Staging of Urothelial Cancer: 2024 Update ACR Appropriateness Criteria® Stress (Fatigue-Insufficiency) Fracture Including Sacrum Excluding Other Vertebrae: 2024 Update ACR Appropriateness Criteria® Thoracic Back Pain
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1