ArticleResearch in nursing & health2025
The Relationship Between a Hospital's Magnet Status and LGBTQ+ Inclusivity in Policies and Practices in US Hospitals.
Article in Research in nursing & health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- LGBTQ+ Inclusive Policies, Nurse Job Outcomes, and Quality of Care in Hospitals.JAMA network open · 2025Article
- Inclusive Hospital Policies, Nurse Burnout, and Job Turnover.Nursing researchArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
LGBTQ+ individuals face discrimination in healthcare settings. Magnet hospitals have been associated with positive patient outcomes, yet it remains uncertain whether Magnet designation is associated with hospitals' LGBTQ+ inclusivity in policies and practices. This study examined 801 American hospitals across 47 states that participated in the Healthcare Equality Index (HEI) in 2021. Multilevel modeling was utilized to investigate the association between Magnet status and HEI scores, adjusting for hospital type and state-level covariates, including LGBTQ+ inclusiveness in laws, political climate, racial/ethnic minority population, and Medicaid expansion status. Among the 801 hospitals, 32.1% (257 hospitals) held Magnet status. Magnet hospitals demonstrated higher HEI scores compared to non-Magnet hospitals (γ = 2.13, p = 0.022), despite significant variations across states (intraclass correlation = 0.22). No significant cross-level interactions were found. Overall, Magnet designation is independently associated with improved LGBTQ+ inclusivity in hospitals regardless of the state in which the hospital is located. Policymakers and healthcare leaders should consider leveraging the Magnet Recognition Program as a benchmark for promoting LGBTQ+ inclusivity within hospitals. Additionally, all healthcare institutions should prioritize comprehensive evaluations and improvements to their policies and practices to ensure inclusivity for LGBTQ+ patients.
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.