ArticleOncology nursing forum2023
Disparities in Cancer Screening in Sexual and Gender Minority Populations: A Secondary Analysis of Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System Data.
Article in Oncology nursing forum, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Sexual minority adults exhibit greater inflammation than heterosexual adults in the context of depressive symptoms and anxiety: Pathways to health disparities.Brain, behavior, and immunity · 2026Article
- Strengthening cancer care for the LGBTQIA+ population in Nepal: A narrative review to set priorities for equitable oncology services.Dialogues in health · 2025Review
- Difference-Makers for Collecting Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity Data in Oncology Settings.Cancer medicine · 2025Article
- Palliative care service provision and use among 2SLGBTQIA + individuals: a scoping review.BMC palliative care · 2024Article
- Strategies for Advancing Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity Data Collection in Cancer Research.JCO oncology practice · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesTo describe cancer screening characteristics and better understand individual-, environmental-, and organizational-level barriers of sexual and gender minority (SGM) populations. SAMPLE AND
settingThis study was conducted using a combined sample from the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS) national dataset from 2014 and 2016. METHODS AND VARIABLES: Chi-square tests for independence and logistic regression analysis tests were performed to determine whether relationships existed between SGM status and demographics.
resultsBlack respondents or those who reported their race as other, were female, had some college or technical school or more, and had healthcare coverage were less likely to present for cancer screening. SGM respondents who were in good or better health; were unmarried; were aged 18-44 years or 45-55 years; or were Asian, Native American, or Hawaiian, or reported their race as other, had higher odds of screening for cancer. IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING: Disparities in cancer screening among SGM populations are not well documented. These findings will inform structured education and preventative interventions to improve screening participation among SGM populations.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.