Back

Effects of LGBTQ+ Affirming Care on Uptake of Preventative Care, Management of Chronic Disease, and Aging Outcomes

McKay, T.; Tran, N.; Barbee, H.; Min, J. K.

2022-05-26 health systems and quality improvement
10.1101/2022.05.26.22275633 medRxiv
Show abstract

IntroductionExperiences of discrimination and bias in health care contribute to health disparities for LGBTQ+ and other minority populations. To avoid discrimination, many LGBTQ+ people go to great lengths to find healthcare providers who they trust and are knowledgeable about their health needs. This study examines whether access to an LGBTQ+ affirming provider may improve health outcomes for LGBTQ+ populations across a range of preventive health and chronic disease management outcomes. MethodsThis cross-sectional study uses Poisson regression models to examine original survey data (n=1,120) from Wave 1 of the Vanderbilt University Social Networks, Aging, and Policy Study (VUSNAPS), a panel study examining older (50{square}76 years) LGBTQ+ adults health and aging, collected between April 2020 and September 2021. ResultsOverall, access to an LGBTQ+ affirming provider is associated with greater uptake of preventive health screenings and improved management of mental health conditions among older LGBTQ+ adults. Compared to participants reporting a usual source of care that is not affirming, participants with an LGBTQ+ affirming provider are more likely to have ever and recently received several types of preventive care, including past year provider visit, flu shot, colorectal cancer screening, and HIV test. Access to an LGBTQ+ affirming provider is also associated with better management of mental health conditions. ConclusionsInclusive care is essential for reducing health disparities among LGBTQ+ populations. Health systems can reduce disparities by expanding education opportunities for providers regarding LGBTQ+ medicine, adopting nondiscrimination policies for LGBTQ+ patients and employees, and ensuring LGBTQ+ care is included in health insurance coverage.

Matching journals

The top 5 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.