Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39445165›Full record

ReviewThe Lancet regional health. Southeast Asia2024

Beyond the bench: LGBTQ+ health equity after India's "no same-sex marriage" verdict.

Sofia Weiss Goitiandia, Akhilesh Agarwal, Smita C Banerjee, Nirmala Bhoo-Pathy, Chandan Bose, Mahati Chittem, Roop Gursahani, L Ramakrishnan, Smriti Rana, Naveen Salins and 3 more

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in The Lancet regional health. Southeast Asia, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Late adolescents' accounts of marginalization in India: Towards a ground-up intersectional framework.Journal of research on adolescence : the official journal of the Society for Research on Adolescence · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. 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

13 authors.

Sofia Weiss GoitiandiaDivision of Hospital Medicine, School of Medicine, University of California, San Francisco, CA, USA.
Akhilesh AgarwalDepartment of Psychiatry, Maimonides Medical Center, Brooklyn, New York, USA.
Smita C BanerjeeDepartment of Psychiatry & Behavioral Sciences, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, USA.
Nirmala Bhoo-PathyDepartment of Social and Preventive Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Universiti Malaya, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.
Chandan BoseDepartment of Liberal Arts, Indian Institute of Technology Hyderabad, Hyderabad, India.
Mahati ChittemDepartment of Liberal Arts, Indian Institute of Technology Hyderabad, Hyderabad, India.
Roop GursahaniP.D. Hinduja Hospital, Mumbai, India.
L RamakrishnanSolidarity and Action Against The HIV Infection in India (SAATHII), Chennai, India.
Smriti RanaStrategic Programs and Partnerships, Pallium India Trust, Trivandrum, India.
Naveen SalinsDepartment of Palliative Medicine and Supportive Care, Kasturba Medical College Manipal, Manipal Academy of Higher Education, Manipal, India.
Malar Velli SegarmurthyKuala Langat District Health Office, Ministry of Health, Malaysia.
Aashiana ThiyamBirmingham and Solihull Mental Health NHS Foundation Trust, Birmingham, UK.
William E RosaDepartment of Psychiatry & Behavioral Sciences, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, USA.

Funding

X-RAY CRYSTALLOGRAPHYP30CA008748 · NCI · SLOAN-KETTERING INSTITUTE FOR CANCER RES · PI SELWYN M VICKERS · 1985 to 2026
$347.4M
NCI NIH HHS P30 CA008748
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

LGBTQ+ people (e.g., lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer or questioning people) experience systemic marginalisation and discrimination globally and throughout India. In October 2023, the Indian Supreme Court rejected the legal recognition of same-sex marriage, blocking marriage equality for LGBTQ+ people and contending that the right to marry neither qualifies as a fundamental right accorded by the Indian Constitution nor falls under the Supreme Court's purview. Although the Supreme Court declared opposition to discrimination based on sexual orientation, its failure to recognise same-sex marriage legally is a substantial obstruction to full LGBTQ+ equality. We propose that the refusal of the Indian legal system to honour same-sex marriage while calling for an end to societal violence and discriminatory behaviour against the LGBTQ+ community is inherently flawed and counterintuitive. Informed by our team's multidisciplinary orientation as healthcare professionals, researchers, and advocates, we delineate explicit challenges that LGBTQ+ people in India may encounter due to the Supreme Court's recent ruling. We subsequently put forth a series of interprofessional and intersectoral recommendations to mitigate this decision's immediate and long-term consequences, providing an actionable path toward LGBTQ+ inclusion, justice, and equity in India.

Indexed as

GayHealth equityIndiaLegal protectionLesbianLGBTLGBTQ+Same-sex marriageSocial justiceSystemic injusticeTransgender

Identifiers

PMID39445165
PMCPMC11497438

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.