ArticleSexual medicine2025
Turkish physicians' approach to lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and other gender and sexual minority individuals and their sexual health.
Article in Sexual medicine, 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.
- Review
- Urological care for sexual and gender minorities: a narrative review toward equitable care.Current opinion in urology · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
21 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and other gender and sexual minority (LGBT+) individuals often face healthcare disparities, and physicians' knowledge, attitudes, and clinical preparedness significantly impact access to competent care. Aim: This study evaluated Turkish physicians' perspectives, knowledge, and clinical approaches to LGBT+ sexual health, highlighting educational and clinical gaps. Methods: A nationwide cross-sectional survey was conducted among physicians from 10 specialties involved in LGBT+ sexual health. The survey, administered anonymously via Google Forms between June 4, 2024, and February 1, 2025, included sociodemographic questions and items assessing attitudes, clinical experience, and guideline familiarity. Statistical analyses included descriptive statistics, chi-square, Fisher's exact tests, and binary logistic regression to identify predictors of physician attitudes and perceived competence. Outcomes: The primary outcome was to assess physicians' perspectives, competency, and willingness to provide LGBT+ healthcare, including gender-affirming procedures. Results: Among 745 participants, 58.8% considered LGBT+ identities normal, while 22.9% classified them as psychiatric disorders. Perceiving LGBT+ identities as normal was significantly associated with being female (OR = 3.12, 95% CI: 1.96-4.96, Clinical Implications: Enhancing physicians' education and competency in LGBT+ healthcare through structured training and standardized guidelines is crucial to improving equitable healthcare delivery. Strengths and Limitations: This study provides novel insights into physicians' attitudes and practices regarding LGBT+ healthcare in Turkey. However, self-reported data may introduce response bias, and findings may not be fully generalizable to other regions. Conclusion: Significant educational and clinical gaps persist in LGBT+ healthcare. Addressing these through structured training programs, standardized protocols, and multidisciplinary collaboration is essential to ensuring competent, inclusive, and ethical medical care.
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.