Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30646332›Full record

ArticleJAMA network open2018

Assessment of Patient-Centered Approaches to Collect Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity Information in the Emergency Department: The EQUALITY Study.

Adil Haider, Rachel R Adler, Eric Schneider, Tarsicio Uribe Leitz, Anju Ranjit, Christina Ta, Adele Levine, Omar Harfouch, Danielle Pelaez, Lisa Kodadek and 6 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JAMA network open, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 44 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
44citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

44 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Observational
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. LGBTQ+ Supportive and Inclusive Care Practices: Survey Data From the T1D Exchange Quality Improvement Collaborative.Diabetes spectrum : a publication of the American Diabetes Association · 2025
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Building a Cancer Care Clinic for Transgender and Gender Diverse Individuals.Mayo Clinic proceedings. Innovations, quality & outcomes · 2024
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Neurological care for LGBT+ people.Nature reviews. Neurology · 2024
    Review
  19. Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

16 authors.

Adil HaiderCenter for Surgery and Public Health, Brigham & Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts.
Rachel R AdlerSchool of Medicine and Public Health, University of Wisconsin, Madison.
Eric SchneiderUniversity of Virginia, Charlottesville.
Tarsicio Uribe LeitzCenter for Surgery and Public Health, Brigham & Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts.
Anju RanjitCenter for Surgery and Public Health, Brigham & Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts.
Christina TaCenter for Surgery and Public Health, Brigham & Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts.
Adele LevineCenter for Surgery and Public Health, Brigham & Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts.
Omar HarfouchJohns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland.
Danielle PelaezJohns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland.
Lisa KodadekJohns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland.
Laura VailJohns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland.
Claire SnyderJohns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland.
Danielle GermanJohns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland.
Susan PetersonJohns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland.
Jeremiah D SchuurBrigham & Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts.
Brandyn D LauJohns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Importance: Health care and government organizations call for routine collection of sexual orientation and gender identity (SOGI) information in the clinical setting, yet patient preferences for collection methods remain unknown. Objective: To assess of the optimal patient-centered approach for SOGI collection in the emergency department (ED) setting. Design, Setting, and Participants: This matched cohort study (Emergency Department Query for Patient-Centered Approaches to Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity [EQUALITY] Study) of 4 EDs on the east coast of the United States sequentially tested 2 different SOGI collection approaches between February 2016 and March 2017. Multivariable ordered logistic regression was used to assess whether either SOGI collection method was associated with higher patient satisfaction with their ED experience. Eligible adults older than 18 years who identified as a sexual or gender minority (SGM) were enrolled and then matched 1 to 1 by age (aged ≥5 years) and illness severity (Emergency Severity Index score ±1) to patients who identified as heterosexual and cisgender (non-SGM), and to patients whose SOGI information was missing (blank field). Patients who identified as SGM, non-SGM, or had a blank field were invited to complete surveys about their ED visit. Data analysis was conducted from April 2017 to November 2017. Interventions: Two SOGI collection approaches were tested: nurse verbal collection during the clinical encounter vs nonverbal collection during patient registration. The ED physicians, physician assistants, nurses, and registrars received education and training on sexual or gender minority health disparities and terminology prior to and throughout the intervention period. Main Outcomes and Measures: A detailed survey, developed with input of a stakeholder advisory board, which included a modified Communication Climate Assessment Toolkit score and additional patient satisfaction measures. Results: A total of 540 enrolled patients were analyzed; the mean age was 36.4 years and 66.5% of those who identified their gender were female. Sexual or gender minority patients had significantly better Communication Climate Assessment Toolkit scores with nonverbal registrar form collection compared with nurse verbal collection (mean [SD], 95.6 [11.9] vs 89.5 [20.5]; P = .03). No significant differences between the 2 approaches were found among non-SGM patients (mean [SD], 91.8 [18.9] vs 93.2 [13.6]; P = .59) or those with a blank field (92.7 [15.9] vs 93.6 [14.7]; P = .70). After adjusting for age, race, illness severity, and site, SGM patients had 2.57 (95% CI, 1.13-5.82) increased odds of a better Communication Climate Assessment Toolkit score category during form collection compared with verbal collection. Conclusions and Relevance: Sexual or gender minority patients reported greater comfort and improved communication when SOGI was collected via nonverbal self-report. Registrar form collection was the optimal patient-centered method for collecting SOGI information in the ED.

Indexed as

AdultAttitude of Health PersonnelCohort StudiesData CollectionEmergency Medical ServicesEmergency Service, HospitalFemaleGender IdentityHealth PersonnelHumansMaleMedical RecordsMiddle AgedPatient-Centered CarePatient SatisfactionProfessional-Patient Relations

Identifiers

PMID30646332
PMCPMC6324335

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.