Callie Kluitenberg Harris, Horng-Shiuann Wu, Rebecca Lehto, Gwen Wyatt, Barbara Given
{"title":"健康决定因素、癌症筛查参与度和少数性特征之间的关系:系统回顾","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":"{\"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}","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
摘要
目的:为了解决性少数群体(SM)中癌症筛查的差异并降低癌症风险,本综述确定了不同性少数群体身份中(不)参与癌症筛查的个人、人际和社区/社会决定因素。方法:检索了七个科学数据库。纳入标准如下:(1) 使用定量方法;(2) 英语;(3) 癌症筛查重点;(4) 至少确定一个 SM 群体。在以下情况下,文章将被排除在外:(1) 分析未按 SM 身份分类(n = 29);(2) 定量分析不包括癌症筛查的决定因素(n = 19)。性与性别少数群体健康差异研究框架指导文献综述。结果:12 项研究涉及宫颈癌(4 项)、乳腺癌(3 项)、乳腺癌/宫颈癌(3 项)或多种癌症(2 项)。其他癌症因纳入/排除标准而被排除在外。样本总数为 20622(平均 1525),包括女同性恋(n = 13409)、双性恋(n = 4442)、男同性恋(n = 1386)、大部分为异性恋(n = 1302)和同性恋(n = 83)。分析个人层面决定因素的研究(n = 8)发现,社会经济地位影响了女同性恋和双性恋参与者的宫颈癌筛查,但不影响乳腺癌筛查(n = 2)。在人际关系层面(n = 7),提供者与患者的关系是女同参与者(n = 4)进行宫颈癌筛查的一个决定因素;其他群体未对这种关系进行研究。分析社区/社会决定因素的研究(n = 5)发现,乡村地区可能会影响女同性恋的宫颈癌筛查,但不会影响双性恋(n = 3)。结论:本综述将社会经济地位、医疗服务提供者与患者的关系以及乡村地区确定为影响 SM 群体癌症筛查的决定因素。虽然文献涉及不同的 SM 群体,但纳入/排除标准确定了针对顺性别女性的研究。解决已确定的宫颈癌筛查决定因素中的差异可能会提高 SM 妇女的参与率。要了解其他 SM 群体癌症筛查的独特决定因素,还需要进一步的研究。
Relationships Among Determinants of Health, Cancer Screening Participation, and Sexual Minority Identity: A Systematic Review.
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.