Healthcare experiences of LGBTQ+ people: non-binary people remain unaffirmed.

IF 2 Q2 SOCIOLOGY Frontiers in Sociology Pub Date : 2024-08-23 eCollection Date: 2024-01-01 DOI:10.3389/fsoc.2024.1448821
Dustin Z Nowaskie, Olwen Menez
{"title":"Healthcare experiences of LGBTQ+ people: non-binary people remain unaffirmed.","authors":"Dustin Z Nowaskie, Olwen Menez","doi":"10.3389/fsoc.2024.1448821","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, and all sexually and gender diverse (LGBTQ+) people experience discrimination across many contexts, including healthcare environments. While some research has shown transgender people and non-binary people often endure higher rates of marginalization than cisgender, sexually diverse people, past data are limited.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A sample of LGBTQ+ people (<i>N</i> = 173) in the United States completed an anonymous, online, self-reported survey, which included the Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems and healthcare experience questions. Groups, including people who identified as cisgender, sexually diverse (<i>n</i> = 116), transgender (<i>n</i> = 24), and non-binary (<i>n</i> = 33), were compared using chi-square and multivariate analysis of covariance tests.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Compared to cisgender, sexually diverse people, non-binary people were less likely to report feeling comfortable with a physical exam, having good mental health, respected by providers, that providers had adequate medical information, that providers could care for someone going through gender affirmation, and that hospital staff were comfortable interacting with them. Additionally, non-binary people were more likely to report hospital staff misgendering them.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>These unique LGBTQ+ subgroup differences may be secondary to identity-specific stigma that non-binary people face. More international studies are needed to elucidate these subgroup-specific healthcare experiences across LGBTQ+ identities.</p>","PeriodicalId":36297,"journal":{"name":"Frontiers in Sociology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11378342/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Frontiers in Sociology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3389/fsoc.2024.1448821","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SOCIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, and all sexually and gender diverse (LGBTQ+) people experience discrimination across many contexts, including healthcare environments. While some research has shown transgender people and non-binary people often endure higher rates of marginalization than cisgender, sexually diverse people, past data are limited.

Methods: A sample of LGBTQ+ people (N = 173) in the United States completed an anonymous, online, self-reported survey, which included the Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems and healthcare experience questions. Groups, including people who identified as cisgender, sexually diverse (n = 116), transgender (n = 24), and non-binary (n = 33), were compared using chi-square and multivariate analysis of covariance tests.

Results: Compared to cisgender, sexually diverse people, non-binary people were less likely to report feeling comfortable with a physical exam, having good mental health, respected by providers, that providers had adequate medical information, that providers could care for someone going through gender affirmation, and that hospital staff were comfortable interacting with them. Additionally, non-binary people were more likely to report hospital staff misgendering them.

Discussion: These unique LGBTQ+ subgroup differences may be secondary to identity-specific stigma that non-binary people face. More international studies are needed to elucidate these subgroup-specific healthcare experiences across LGBTQ+ identities.

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
女同性恋、男同性恋、双性恋和变性者(LGBTQ+)的医疗保健经历:非二元人群仍未得到肯定。
导言:女同性恋、男同性恋、双性恋、变性人、同性恋者以及所有性取向和性别多样化(LGBTQ+)的人在包括医疗保健环境在内的许多环境中都会遭受歧视。虽然一些研究表明,变性人和非二元人遭受边缘化的比例往往高于顺性别者和性取向多样化者,但以往的数据却很有限:美国的 LGBTQ+ 人士(N = 173)完成了一项匿名的在线自我报告调查,其中包括 "医疗保健提供者和系统消费者评估 "和医疗保健经验问题。我们使用卡方检验和多变量协方差检验对各组(包括顺性别者、性取向多样化者(n = 116)、变性者(n = 24)和非二元性者(n = 33))进行了比较:与双性恋者、性取向不同者相比,非二元者不太可能表示在体检时感觉舒适、精神健康状况良好、受到医疗服务提供者的尊重、医疗服务提供者有足够的医疗信息、医疗服务提供者可以照顾正在进行性别确认的人,以及医院工作人员与他们互动时感觉舒适。此外,非二元性别者更有可能报告医院工作人员对他们的性别有误解:这些独特的 LGBTQ+ 亚群差异可能是由于非二元人所面临的特定身份污名造成的。需要更多的国际研究来阐明这些LGBTQ+身份亚群体特有的医疗保健经历。
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
Frontiers in Sociology
Frontiers in Sociology Social Sciences-Social Sciences (all)
CiteScore
3.40
自引率
4.00%
发文量
198
审稿时长
14 weeks
期刊最新文献
Evaluating policies and regulations used to control corruption among accounting officers in the public sector of South Africa: a systematic literature review. Who is the next leader? Understanding women leadership development and succession planning in Saudi Arabian higher educational institutions. Communicating international politics narratives of security, democracy and human rights in contemporary society: indexing and analysis using online monitoring data. On the brink of social resistance: local community perceptions of mining company operating permits in East Luwu, Indonesia. COVID-19, social media, algorithms and the rise of indigenous movements in Southern Africa: perspectives from activists, audiences and policymakers.
×
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