Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39671192›Full record

ArticleJAMA network open2024

Loneliness and Social and Emotional Support Among Sexual and Gender Minority Caregivers.

Zhigang Xie, Hanadi Hamadi, Kassie Terrell, Laggy George, Jennifer Wells, Jiaming Liang

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JAMA network open, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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

6 authors.

Zhigang XieDepartment of Public Health, University of North Florida, Jacksonville.
Hanadi HamadiDepartment of Health Administration, University of North Florida, Jacksonville.
Kassie TerrellDepartment of Public Health, University of North Florida, Jacksonville.
Laggy GeorgeDepartment of Public Health, University of North Florida, Jacksonville.
Jennifer WellsDepartment of Public Health, University of North Florida, Jacksonville.
Jiaming LiangSchool of Public Health, University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston, San Antonio.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Importance: Sexual and gender minority (SGM) adults in the US are more likely than their non-SGM counterparts to provide informal care to their family members and/or friends. Caregiving can impose substantial physical, mental, and social connection issues on caregivers. Objective: To examine the associations among loneliness, lack of social and emotional support, sexual orientation, gender identity, and informal caregiving status. Design, Setting, and Participants: This population-based, cross-sectional study used data from the 2022 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System collected from noninstitutionalized US civilian residents aged 18 years or older. Data analysis was conducted from June to July 2024. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary dependent variables included self-reported dichotomized (yes vs no) loneliness and lack of social and emotional support. The primary independent variables were sexual orientation (straight, gay or lesbian, bisexual, or something else), gender identity (cisgender and transgender), and informal caregiving status (yes vs no). A binomial distribution and log link function were used to derive adjusted prevalence ratios (APRs) and their respective 95% CIs for each outcome measure. Results: The analytic sample included 43 693 US adults (23 223 [51.6%] female at birth). In multivariable regression analyses adjusting for sociodemographic and health factors, among caregivers only, and compared with straight individuals, loneliness was significantly more likely among lesbian or gay individuals (APR, 1.30; 95% CI, 1.11-1.51), bisexual individuals (APR, 1.26; 95% CI, 1.12-1.43), and those who identify as something else (APR, 1.26; 95% CI, 1.09-1.46). Similarly, for noncaregivers, lesbian or gay individuals (APR, 1.34; 95% CI, 1.15-1.57), bisexual individuals (APR, 1.47; 95% CI, 1.34-1.61), and individuals identifying as something else (APR, 1.41; 95% CI, 1.25-1.58) experienced significantly higher risk of loneliness than straight noncaregivers. Transgender caregivers were more likely than cisgender caregivers to report loneliness (APR, 1.34; 95% CI, 1.24-1.46). In terms of lack of social and emotional support, bisexual caregivers (APR, 1.21; 95% CI, 1.00-1.48) and caregivers identifying as something else (APR, 1.34; 95% CI, 1.09-1.66) were significantly more likely than straight caregivers to report a lack of social and emotional support. Similarly, both bisexual noncaregivers (APR, 1.44; 95% CI, 1.28-1.63) and noncaregivers identifying as something else (APR, 1.38; 95% CI, 1.18-1.61) experienced a significantly higher risk of lacking support compared with straight noncaregivers. Conclusions and Relevance: In this cross-sectional study of social connections, SGM adults experienced significantly higher levels of loneliness compared with straight adults, irrespective of caregiving status. Furthermore, caregiving exacerbated these disparities across SGM subgroups. Patterns of lack of social and emotional support mirrored those of loneliness across different SGM and caregiving subpopulations, with nuances emerging upon adjustment for individual characteristics.

Indexed as

CaregiversLonelinessSexual and Gender MinoritiesSocial SupportAdolescentAdultAgedBehavioral Risk Factor Surveillance SystemCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedUnited StatesYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID39671192
PMCPMC11645647

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.