ArticleJMIR human factors2025
Gender-Inclusive Language in Public-Facing Labor and Delivery Web Pages in the New York Tristate Area: Cross-Sectional Study.
Article in JMIR human factors, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Gender Inclusivity and Exclusivity in US Hospitals' Online Obstetrics, Labor and Delivery, and Pregnancy-Related Resources: Cross-Sectional Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Observational
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Transgender and nonbinary (TGNB) individuals are increasingly intentionally becoming pregnant to raise children, and hospital websites should reflect these trends. For prospective TGNB parents, a hospital website is the only way they can assess their safety from discrimination while receiving perinatal care. Cisnormativity enforced by communication gaps between medical institutions and TGNB patients can and has caused delays in receiving urgent care during their pregnancy. Objective: The aim of this study was to evaluate the current prevalence of gender-inclusive terminology among labor and delivery services in the New York tristate area. Methods: The labor and delivery web pages of 189 hospitals from New York, New Jersey, and Connecticut were examined for gender-inclusive language. "Fully inclusive" websites explicitly acknowledged lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, intersex, and asexual plus other gender- and sexual-oriented (LGBTQIA+) parents, "inclusive" websites did not use gendered terminology for parents, and "noninclusive" websites used gendered terms at least once in the text reviewed. The hospitals' web pages were further stratified by Healthcare Equality Index scores and population classifications defined by the 2013 National Center for Health Statistics Urban-Rural classification given to the county that each hospital was located in. Results: Of the 300 hospital websites reviewed, only 189 websites met the criteria for inclusion. Overall, only 6.3% (n=12) of labor and delivery web pages were "inclusive" or "fully inclusive." No geographic areas (P=.61) or Healthcare Equality Index scores (P=.81) were associated with inclusive or fully inclusive language. Conclusions: Hospitals need to use inclusive language to help TGNB people identify hospitals where their existence and needs are acknowledged and thus feel more comfortable in their transition to parenthood.
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.