在人口健康研究中,同性伴侣居住的地方是衡量单身女同性恋、男同性恋和双性恋者居住的有效标准吗?2017年美国全国概率电话调查结果。

Joseph G L Lee, Marcella H Boynton, Bonnie E Shook-Sa, Thomas Wimark
{"title":"在人口健康研究中,同性伴侣居住的地方是衡量单身女同性恋、男同性恋和双性恋者居住的有效标准吗?2017年美国全国概率电话调查结果。","authors":"Joseph G L Lee,&nbsp;Marcella H Boynton,&nbsp;Bonnie E Shook-Sa,&nbsp;Thomas Wimark","doi":"10.1891/lgbtq-2019-0009","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Emerging evidence using the concentration of same-sex couples from the U.S. Census suggests lesbian, gay, and bisexual (LGB), and transgender (LGBT; i.e., sexual and gender minority [SGM]) people living as a same-sex couple are concentrated in less healthful neighborhoods. However, it is unclear if findings would be different if based on where LGBT individuals live. Thus, we sought to assess differences in neighborhood, county, and state characteristics between same-sex couples and LGBT individuals to inform population health research and policy interventions on LGBT health inequities. In 2017, we conducted a cross-sectional national, probability survey of LGBT adults in the U.S. and geocoded addresses (<i>N</i>=407). We linked locations with census tract, county, and state characteristics selected based on health inequities theories. In 2019, we used weighted analysis to calculate descriptive statistics and conducted planned contrasts of location characteristics by both cohabitation status and gender. Many location characteristics were similar by cohabitation status and gender. However, the tract proportion of Black residents and county crime rate were lower for cohabitating than non-cohabitating men. State smoke-free air score was weaker for cohabitating than non-cohabitating women. The use of same-sex couples to determine the geographical clustering of LGBT lives in the U.S. may give a reasonable indication of overall spatial characteristics but can underestimate some important determinants of health. Care should be taken using same-sex couples as a proxy for LGBT concentration when racial segregation is a potential confounder.</p>","PeriodicalId":72223,"journal":{"name":"Annals of LGBTQ public and population health","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7891493/pdf/nihms-1633920.pdf","citationCount":"3","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Is Where Same-Sex Couples Live a Valid Measure for Where Single Lesbian, Gay, and Bisexual People Live in Population Health Research? Results from a National Probability Phone Survey, 2017, United States.\",\"authors\":\"Joseph G L Lee,&nbsp;Marcella H Boynton,&nbsp;Bonnie E Shook-Sa,&nbsp;Thomas Wimark\",\"doi\":\"10.1891/lgbtq-2019-0009\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Emerging evidence using the concentration of same-sex couples from the U.S. Census suggests lesbian, gay, and bisexual (LGB), and transgender (LGBT; i.e., sexual and gender minority [SGM]) people living as a same-sex couple are concentrated in less healthful neighborhoods. However, it is unclear if findings would be different if based on where LGBT individuals live. Thus, we sought to assess differences in neighborhood, county, and state characteristics between same-sex couples and LGBT individuals to inform population health research and policy interventions on LGBT health inequities. In 2017, we conducted a cross-sectional national, probability survey of LGBT adults in the U.S. and geocoded addresses (<i>N</i>=407). We linked locations with census tract, county, and state characteristics selected based on health inequities theories. In 2019, we used weighted analysis to calculate descriptive statistics and conducted planned contrasts of location characteristics by both cohabitation status and gender. Many location characteristics were similar by cohabitation status and gender. However, the tract proportion of Black residents and county crime rate were lower for cohabitating than non-cohabitating men. State smoke-free air score was weaker for cohabitating than non-cohabitating women. The use of same-sex couples to determine the geographical clustering of LGBT lives in the U.S. may give a reasonable indication of overall spatial characteristics but can underestimate some important determinants of health. Care should be taken using same-sex couples as a proxy for LGBT concentration when racial segregation is a potential confounder.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":72223,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Annals of LGBTQ public and population health\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7891493/pdf/nihms-1633920.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"3\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Annals of LGBTQ public and population health\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1891/lgbtq-2019-0009\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Annals of LGBTQ public and population health","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1891/lgbtq-2019-0009","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

摘要

利用美国人口普查中同性伴侣的集中程度,新出现的证据表明,女同性恋、男同性恋、双性恋(LGB)和变性人(LGBT);即,作为同性伴侣生活的性和性别少数群体(SGM)集中在不太健康的社区。然而,尚不清楚的是,如果LGBT人群居住的地方不同,调查结果是否会有所不同。因此,我们试图评估同性伴侣和LGBT个体在社区、县和州特征上的差异,为人群健康研究和针对LGBT健康不平等的政策干预提供信息。2017年,我们对美国LGBT成年人和地理编码地址(N=407)进行了全国性的横断面概率调查。我们将地点与基于健康不平等理论选择的人口普查区、县和州特征联系起来。2019年,我们采用加权分析法计算描述性统计,并对同居状况和性别的区位特征进行有计划的对比。同居状况和性别的区位特征有很多相似之处。然而,黑人居民的土地比例和县犯罪率都低于非同居男性。同居女性的州无烟空气评分低于非同居女性。用同性伴侣来确定美国LGBT人群的地理分布,可能会给出总体空间特征的合理指示,但可能低估了健康的一些重要决定因素。当种族隔离是一个潜在的混杂因素时,应该小心使用同性伴侣作为LGBT集中的代表。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Is Where Same-Sex Couples Live a Valid Measure for Where Single Lesbian, Gay, and Bisexual People Live in Population Health Research? Results from a National Probability Phone Survey, 2017, United States.

Emerging evidence using the concentration of same-sex couples from the U.S. Census suggests lesbian, gay, and bisexual (LGB), and transgender (LGBT; i.e., sexual and gender minority [SGM]) people living as a same-sex couple are concentrated in less healthful neighborhoods. However, it is unclear if findings would be different if based on where LGBT individuals live. Thus, we sought to assess differences in neighborhood, county, and state characteristics between same-sex couples and LGBT individuals to inform population health research and policy interventions on LGBT health inequities. In 2017, we conducted a cross-sectional national, probability survey of LGBT adults in the U.S. and geocoded addresses (N=407). We linked locations with census tract, county, and state characteristics selected based on health inequities theories. In 2019, we used weighted analysis to calculate descriptive statistics and conducted planned contrasts of location characteristics by both cohabitation status and gender. Many location characteristics were similar by cohabitation status and gender. However, the tract proportion of Black residents and county crime rate were lower for cohabitating than non-cohabitating men. State smoke-free air score was weaker for cohabitating than non-cohabitating women. The use of same-sex couples to determine the geographical clustering of LGBT lives in the U.S. may give a reasonable indication of overall spatial characteristics but can underestimate some important determinants of health. Care should be taken using same-sex couples as a proxy for LGBT concentration when racial segregation is a potential confounder.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Coping and Social Support in Relation to Minority Stress and Cigarette Smoking Among Lesbian, Gay, and Bisexual Veterans Perceptions of a Cardiovascular Risk Reduction Intervention for Sexual Minority Adults “By Us, for Us”: Qualitative Insights to Inform Implementation of Comprehensive Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis Services in a Trans Community Center “Neutrality Is Affirming”: How Do Sexual and Gender Minority Adults Find and Define Affirming Healthcare? The Experiences of Sexual and Gender Minority Participants With a Remote Biospecimen Collection Protocol
×
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