Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37782536›Full record

ArticleJMIR research protocols2023

Recruiting Sexual and Gender Minority Veterans for Health Disparities Research: Recruitment Protocol of a Web-Based Prospective Cohort Study.

Carolyn A Fan, Michelle Upham, Kristine Beaver, Krista Dashtestani, Malachi M Skiby, Kimberly Z Pentel, Isaac C Rhew, Michael R Kauth, Jillian C Shipherd, Debra Kaysen and 2 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR research protocols, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
1.3field-weighted citation impact, top 18% of its field
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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 4 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

12 authors at 7 institutions in 1 country.

Carolyn A FanDepartment of Health Systems and Population Health, University of Washington School of Public Health, Seattle, WA, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3382-1289
Michelle UphamHealth Services Research & Development (HSR&D) Center of Innovation (COIN), VA Puget Sound Health Care System, Seattle, WA, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2799-8758
Kristine BeaverHealth Services Research & Development (HSR&D) Center of Innovation (COIN), VA Puget Sound Health Care System, Seattle, WA, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5206-5680
Krista DashtestaniHealth Services Research & Development (HSR&D) Center of Innovation (COIN), VA Puget Sound Health Care System, Seattle, WA, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7788-6688
Malachi M SkibyDowntown Emergency Service Center (DESC), Seattle, WA, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1975-6241
Kimberly Z PentelPacific Northwest Individual and Couple Therapy, Seattle, WA, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0515-8205
Isaac C RhewDepartment of Psychiatry & Behavioral Sciences, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, WA, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9731-8776
Michael R KauthLGBTQ+ Health Program, Office of Patient Care Services, Veterans Health Administration, Washington, DC, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0766-8404
Jillian C ShipherdLGBTQ+ Health Program, Office of Patient Care Services, Veterans Health Administration, Washington, DC, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6742-7912
Debra KaysenDepartment of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7961-2787
Tracy SimpsonDepartment of Psychiatry & Behavioral Sciences, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, WA, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3333-9735
Keren LehavotDepartment of Health Systems and Population Health, University of Washington School of Public Health, Seattle, WA, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0230-2910
University of Washington · USVA Puget Sound Health Care System · USBoston University · USDowntown Women's Health Care · USMichael E. DeBakey VA Medical Center · USPacific Northwest Diabetes Research Institute · USVA Palo Alto Health Care System · US

Funding

AHRQ HHS T32 HS013853HSRD VA I01 HX002423
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe Health for Every Veteran Study is the first Veterans Health Administration-funded, nationwide study on lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, and other sexual and gender minority (LGBTQ+) veterans' health that relies exclusively on primary recruitment methods. This study aimed to recruit 1600 veterans with diverse sexual and gender identities to study the mental health and health risk behaviors of this population. A growing body of literature highlights the health inequities faced by LGBTQ+ veterans when compared with their heterosexual or cisgender peer groups. However, there is little to no guidance in the health disparities literature describing the recruitment of LGBTQ+ veterans.

objectiveThis paper provides an overview of the recruitment methodology of Health for Every Veteran Study. We describe the demographics of the enrolled cohort, challenges faced during recruitment, and considerations for recruiting LGBTQ+ veterans for health research.

methodsRecruitment for this study was conducted for 15 months, from September 2019 to December 2020, with the goal of enrolling 1600 veterans evenly split among 8 sexual orientation and gender identity subgroups: cisgender heterosexual women, cisgender lesbian women, cisgender bisexual women, cisgender heterosexual men, cisgender gay men, cisgender bisexual men, transgender women, and transgender men. Three primary recruitment methods were used: social media advertising predominantly through Facebook ads, outreach to community organizations serving veterans and LGBTQ+ individuals across the United States, and contracting with a research recruitment company, Trialfacts.

resultsOf the 3535 participants screened, 1819 participants met the eligibility criteria, and 1062 completed the baseline survey to enroll. At baseline, 25.24% (268/1062) were recruited from Facebook ads, 40.49% (430/1062) from community outreach, and 34.27% (364/1062) from Trialfacts. Most subgroups neared the target enrollment goals, except for cisgender bisexual men, women, and transgender men. An exploratory group of nonbinary and genderqueer veterans and veterans with diverse gender identities was included in the study.

conclusionsAll recruitment methods contributed to significant portions of the enrolled cohort, suggesting that a multipronged approach was a critical and successful strategy in our study of LGBTQ+ veterans. We discuss the strengths and challenges of all recruitment methods, including factors impacting recruitment such as the COVID-19 pandemic, negative comments on Facebook ads, congressional budget delays, and high-volume surges of heterosexual participants from community outreach. In addition, our subgroup stratification offers important disaggregated insights into the recruitment of specific LGBTQ+ subgroups. Finally, the web-based methodology offers important perspectives not only for reaching veterans outside of the Veterans Health Administration but also for research studies taking place in the COVID-19-impacted world. Overall, this study outlines useful recruitment methodologies and lessons learned to inform future research that seeks to recruit marginalized communities. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/43824.

Indexed as

health disparitieslesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, and other sexual and gender minorityLGBTQ+recruitmentveteran

Identifiers

PMID37782536
PMCPMC10580138
OpenAlexW4387241533

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.