Measuring sex, gender, and sexual orientation: one step to health equity

Gender(ed) science: How the institutionalization of gender continues to shape the conduct and content of women's health research

Gender refers to the socially constructed roles, behaviors, and attributes that a particular society considers appropriate for men and women based on assumptions about biological sex. It also operates as a major social organizing principle that confers unequal power, status, and resources to men and women, with direct consequences for health. Historic patriarchal and misogynistic beliefs and values are reinforced through social institutions, including health science, which reify gender inequities. This commentary examines two key domains in which the social organization and institutionalization of gender in scientific research affect the conduct of women's health research and, by extension, women's health outcomes. These domains are: 1) decisions about which topics are prioritized, researched, and funded and 2) the dissemination of research findings. Using the National Institutes of Health (NIH) as a case study to illustrate broader patterns in scientific research, we present evidence of gender-based inequities in what is prioritized, deemed fundable, and disseminated, and how this affects knowledge production and attention to women's health. We highlight efforts and progress made by the NIH and call for additional attention to further address gender-based inequities and their impact on women's health research. We conclude with a call for critical social science analyses-ideally supported by the NIH-of the social organization of health science research to identify points of intervention for redressing deep-seated obstacles to advancing research on women's health.

The anti-gender threat: An ethical, democratic, and scientific imperative for NIH research/ers

Anti-gender campaigns in the United States and globally have promoted policies and legislation that significantly limit bodily autonomy for women, transgender, and nonbinary people. This attack on the human rights of women and gender-diverse communities not only reflects implicit and explicit bias but also detrimentally impacts population health and well-being. We outline the domestic and global rise of anti-gender campaigns and their deep historical connections to broader forms of discrimination and inequality to argue that there is an ethical, democratic, and scientific imperative to more critically center and contextualize gender in health research. While the inclusion of gender as a complex concept in research design, implementation, and dissemination is important, we emphasize that gender inequities must be understood as inextricable from other systems of discrimination and exclusion. To that end, this commentary outlines two actions: for researchers to advance critical approaches to gender as part of a broader landscape of discrimination, and for the US National Institutes of Health to integrate both sex and gender into funded research.

Sexual and reproductive health among forcibly displaced persons in urban environments in low and middle-income countries: scoping review findings

BACKGROUND

Most forcibly displaced persons are hosted in low- and middle-income countries (LMIC). There is a growing urbanization of forcibly displaced persons, whereby most refugees and nearly half of internally displaced persons live in urban areas. This scoping review assesses the sexual and reproductive health (SRH) needs, outcomes, and priorities among forcibly displaced persons living in urban LMIC.

METHODS

Following The Joanna Briggs Institute scoping review methodology we searched eight databases for literature published between 1998 and 2023 on SRH needs among urban refugees in LMIC. SHR was operationalized as any dimension of sexual health (comprehensive sexuality education [CSE]; sexual and gender based violence [GBV]; HIV and STI prevention and control; sexual function and psychosexual counseling) and/or reproductive health (antental, intrapartum, and postnatal care; contraception; fertility care; safe abortion care). Searches included peer-reviewed and grey literature studies across quantitative, qualitative, or mixed-methods designs.

FINDINGS

The review included 92 studies spanning 100 countries: 55 peer-reviewed publications and 37 grey literature reports. Most peer-reviewed articles (n = 38) discussed sexual health domains including: GBV (n = 23); HIV/STI (n = 19); and CSE (n = 12). Over one-third (n = 20) discussed reproductive health, including: antenatal, intrapartum and postnatal care (n = 13); contraception (n = 13); fertility (n = 1); and safe abortion (n = 1). Eight included both reproductive and sexual health. Most grey literature (n = 29) examined GBV vulnerabilities. Themes across studies revealed social-ecological barriers to realizing optimal SRH and accessing SRH services, including factors spanning structural (e.g., livelihood loss), health institution (e.g., lack of health insurance), community (e.g., reduced social support), interpersonal (e.g., gender inequitable relationships), and intrapersonal (e.g., low literacy) levels.

CONCLUSIONS

This review identified displacement processes, resource insecurities, and multiple forms of stigma as factors contributing to poor SRH outcomes, as well as producing SRH access barriers for forcibly displaced individuals in urban LMIC. Findings have implications for mobilizing innovative approaches such as self-care strategies for SRH (e.g., HIV self-testing) to address these gaps. Regions such as Africa, Latin America, and the Caribbean are underrepresented in research in this review. Our findings can guide SRH providers, policymakers, and researchers to develop programming to address the diverse SRH needs of urban forcibly displaced persons in LMIC. Most forcibly displaced individuals live in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), with a significant number residing in urban areas. This scoping review examines the sexual and reproductive health (SRH) outcomes of forcibly displaced individuals in urban LMICs. We searched eight databases for relevant literature published between 1998 and 2023. Inclusion criteria encompassed peer-reviewed articles and grey literature. SRH was defined to include various dimensions of sexual health (comprehensive sexuality education; sexual and gender-based violence; HIV/ STI prevention; sexual function, and psychosexual counseling) and reproductive health (antenatal, intrapartum, and postnatal care; contraception; fertility care; and safe abortion care). We included 90 documents (53 peer-reviewed articles, 37 grey literature reports) spanning 100 countries. Most peer-reviewed articles addressed sexual health and approximately one-third centered reproductive health. The grey literature primarily explored sexual and gender-based violence vulnerabilities. Identified SRH barriers encompassed challenges across structural (livelihood loss), health institution (lack of insurance), community (reduced social support), interpersonal (gender inequities), and individual (low literacy) levels. Findings underscore gaps in addressing SRH needs among urban refugees in LMICs specifically regarding sexual function, fertility care, and safe abortion, as well as regional knowledge gaps regarding urban refugees in Africa, Latin America, and the Caribbean. Self-care strategies for SRH (e.g., HIV self-testing, long-acting self-injectable contraception, abortion self-management) hold significant promise to address SRH barriers experienced by urban refugees and warrant further exploration with this population. Urgent research efforts are necessary to bridge these knowledge gaps and develop tailored interventions aimed at supporting urban refugees in LMICs.

Exploring Gender Differences in Veterans in a Secondary Analysis of a Randomized Controlled Trial of Mindfulness for Chronic Pain

Background

Although studies have documented higher rates of chronic pain among women Veterans compared to men Veterans, there remains a lack of comprehensive information about potential contributors to these disparities.

Materials and Methods

This study examined gender differences in chronic pain and its contributors among 419 men and 392 women Veterans, enrolled in a mindfulness trial for chronic pain. We conducted descriptive analyses summarizing distributions of baseline measures, obtained by survey and through the electronic health record. Comparisons between genders were conducted using chi-square tests for categorical variables and t-tests for continuous measures.

Results

Compared to men, women Veterans were more likely to have chronic overlapping pain conditions and had higher levels of pain interference and intensity. Women had higher prevalence of psychiatric and sleep disorder diagnoses, greater levels of depression, anxiety, post-traumatic stress disorder, fatigue, sleep disturbance, stress and pain catastrophizing, and lower levels of pain self-efficacy and participation in social roles and activities. However, women were less likely to smoke or have a substance abuse disorder and used more nonpharmacological pain treatment modalities.

Conclusion

Among Veterans seeking treatment for chronic pain, women differed from men in their type of pain, had greater pain intensity and interference, and had greater prevalence and higher levels of many known biopsychosocial contributors to pain. Results point to the need for pain treatment that addresses the comprehensive needs of women Veterans.

Clinical Trial Registration Number: NCT04526158. Patient enrollment began on December 4, 2020.

Minority stressors, traumatic events, and associations with mental health and school climate among gender and sexuality diverse young people in Australia: Findings from a nationally representative cohort study

INTRODUCTION

Population-level, nationally representative data on the prevalence of minority stressors and traumatic events, mental ill-health effects, and the preventative utility of school climate, among gender and sexuality diverse young people in Australia, is significantly lacking. In this study, we estimated the prevalence and distribution of minority stressors and traumatic events among young people by sexuality identity (gay/lesbian, bisexual, other sexuality, heterosexual), sexuality diversity (sexuality diverse, not sexuality diverse), and gender identity (transgender, cisgender) and assessed associations with mental ill-health and the moderating role of school climate factors.

METHODS

Using Wave 8 (2018) follow-up data from a population-level, nationally representative longitudinal cohort study, the sample comprised 3037 young people aged 17-19 years in Australia. Prevalence ratios for minority stressors and traumatic events were calculated for gender and sexuality diverse categories using logistic regression models. Linear regression models were used to test associations between traumatic events and minority stressors, and mental ill-health. Multivariate linear regression tested school climate factors as effect modifier between minority stressors and mental ill-health among sexuality diverse young people.

RESULTS

Rates of traumatic events and minority stressors were highest among bisexual and gay/lesbian young people and were significantly associated with mental ill-health among all gender and sexuality diverse young people. Highest mental ill-health effects were observed among trans young people. Among sexuality diverse young people, positive and negative feelings toward school climate were associated with decreased and increased mental ill-health, respectively. After accounting for sexuality diversity, positive overall school climate appeared protective of mental ill-health effects of sexuality-based discrimination.

DISCUSSION

Minority stressors, traumatic events, and associated mental ill-health are prevalent among gender and sexuality diverse young people in Australia, especially trans, bisexual, and gay/lesbian young people. Promotion of affirmative, safe, and inclusive school climate demonstrates significant promise for the prevention and early intervention of mental ill-health among gender and sexuality diverse young people.

Sex and gender in infection and immunity: addressing the bottlenecks from basic science to public health and clinical applications

Although sex and gender are recognized as major determinants of health and immunity, their role is rarely considered in clinical practice and public health. We identified six bottlenecks preventing the inclusion of sex and gender considerations from basic science to clinical practice, precision medicine and public health policies. (i) A terminology-related bottleneck, linked to the definitions of sex and gender themselves, and the lack of consensus on how to evaluate gender. (ii) A data-related bottleneck, due to gaps in sex-disaggregated data, data on trans/non-binary people and gender identity. (iii) A translational bottleneck, limited by animal models and the underrepresentation of gender minorities in biomedical studies. (iv) A statistical bottleneck, with inappropriate statistical analyses and results interpretation. (v) An ethical bottleneck posed by the underrepresentation of pregnant people and gender minorities in clinical studies. (vi) A structural bottleneck, as systemic bias and discriminations affect not only academic research but also decision makers. We specify guidelines for researchers, scientific journals, funding agencies and academic institutions to address these bottlenecks. Following such guidelines will support the development of more efficient and equitable care strategies for all.

COVID-19 infection and vaccination uptake in men and gender-diverse people who have sex with men in the UK: analyses of a large, online community cross-sectional survey (RiiSH-COVID) undertaken November-December 2021

BACKGROUND

Men and gender-diverse people who have sex with men are disproportionately affected by health conditions associated with increased risk of severe illness due to COVID-19 infection.

METHODS

An online cross-sectional survey of men and gender-diverse people who have sex with men in the UK recruited via social networking and dating applications from 22 November-12 December 2021. Eligible participants included self-identifying men, transgender women, or gender-diverse individuals assigned male at birth (AMAB), aged ≥ 16, who were UK residents, and self-reported having had sex with an individual AMAB in the last year. We calculated self-reported COVID-19 test-positivity, proportion reporting long COVID, and COVID-19 vaccination uptake anytime from pandemic start to survey completion (November/December 2021). Logistic regression was used to assess sociodemographic, clinical, and behavioural characteristics associated with SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) test positivity and complete vaccination (≥ 2 vaccine doses).

RESULTS

Among 1,039 participants (88.1% white, median age 41 years [interquartile range: 31-51]), 18.6% (95% CI: 16.3%-21.1%) reported COVID-19 test positivity, 8.3% (95% CI: 6.7%-10.1%) long COVID, and 94.5% (95% CI: 93.3%-96.1%) complete COVID-19 vaccination through late 2021. In multivariable models, COVID-19 test positivity was associated with UK country of residence (aOR: 2.22 [95% CI: 1.26-3.92], England vs outside England) and employment (aOR: 1.55 [95% CI: 1.01-2.38], current employment vs not employed). Complete COVID-19 vaccination was associated with age (aOR: 1.04 [95% CI: 1.01-1.06], per increasing year), gender (aOR: 0.26 [95% CI: 0.09-0.72], gender minority vs cisgender), education (aOR: 2.11 [95% CI: 1.12-3.98], degree-level or higher vs below degree-level), employment (aOR: 2.07 [95% CI: 1.08-3.94], current employment vs not employed), relationship status (aOR: 0.50 [95% CI: 0.25-1.00], single vs in a relationship), COVID-19 infection history (aOR: 0.47 [95% CI: 0.25-0.88], test positivity or self-perceived infection vs no history), known HPV vaccination (aOR: 3.32 [95% CI: 1.43-7.75]), and low self-worth (aOR: 0.29 [95% CI: 0.15-0.54]).

CONCLUSIONS

In this community sample, COVID-19 vaccine uptake was high overall, though lower among younger age-groups, gender minorities, and those with poorer well-being. Efforts are needed to limit COVID-19 related exacerbation of health inequalities in groups who already experience a greater burden of poor health relative to other men who have sex with men.

Improving the inclusion of transgender and nonbinary individuals in the planning, completion, and mobilization of cardiovascular research

Cardiovascular disease is the leading cause of morbidity and mortality globally. Transgender and nonbinary (TNB) individuals face unclear but potentially significant cardiovascular health inequities, yet no TNB-specific evidence-based interventions for cardiovascular risk reduction currently exist. To address this gap, we propose a road map to improve the inclusion of TNB individuals in the planning, completion, and mobilization of cardiovascular research. In doing so, the adoption of inclusive practices would optimize cardiovascular health surveillance and care for TNB communities.

When primary healthcare meets queerstory: community-based system dynamics influencing regional/rural LGBTQ + people's access to quality primary healthcare in Australia

BACKGROUND

Lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, Queer, and people of any other minority sexuality or gender identity (LGBTQ + or "Queer") are often marginalised from accessing quality primary healthcare (PHC) in their local community. This is largely due to Queerphobic, cis-heteronormative/sexist systems pathologising Queer life and identities. The study aims were to: (1) identify key priorities for increasing Queer people's access to quality PHC as told by Queer people themselves, (2) identify the feedback loops that reduce or support Queer people's access to quality PHC in non-metropolitan, regional/rural communities, and (3) identify potential action areas to improve system structures to increase Queer people's access to quality PHC.

METHODS

Group Model Building (GMB) workshops were held with a small group (n = 8) of LGBTQ + people in regional Victoria with lived experience of using PHC services. This participatory approach permits exploration and visual mapping of local structures causing behaviour patterns of community concern over time - in this case, Queer people's ability to access quality PHC in the Geelong-Barwon region. This is the first study that specially applies GMB in Queer PHC in the non-metropolitan regional/rural context.

RESULTS

Key community identified PHC priorities were: (a) providers' level of Queer Literacy, (b) the responsibility of Queer Advocacy (at individual, systemic, and collective levels), (c) support from safe Queer Spaces, (d) strength from a Queer Presence, and (e) power from Intersectional Queer Life. These priorities interconnected, creating system-level feedback loops reinforcing barriers and enablers to Queer people's access to quality PHC in the Geelong-Barwon region; with potential action areas identified.

CONCLUSIONS

Improving Queer people's access to quality PHC in the Geelong-Barwon region requires embedding principles of Queer Literacy, Queer Advocacy, Queer Space, Queer Presence, and Intersectional Queer Life within practices and service systems. The study findings were distilled into a novel, preliminary set of Queer Equity Principles. These need to be taken back to regional Queer communities for further co-design and planning for translation across PHC practices and systems, with potential applicability in other areas of the healthcare spectrum.