ArticleF&S reports2025
Knowledge of and access to family-building resources among LGBTQ+ medical residents in the United States: a cross-sectional survey.
Article in F&S reports, 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.
- Educational Strategies to Support LGBTQ+ Trainees in Graduate Medical Education - A Narrative Review.Advances in medical education and practice · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To assess the knowledge, need, and utilization of reproductive services among LGBTQ+ medical residents compared with non-LGBTQ+ counterparts. Design: A survey with multiple-choice and Likert-type items was sent to US medical residents to collect demographic information and family-building goals. Descriptive statistics and univariate comparisons between cisgender/heterosexual and LGBTQ+ groups were performed. Subjects: All medical residents training in the United States in 2024. Exposure: Cross-sectional survey. Main Outcome Measures: Family-building knowledge and goals. Results: Out of 660 participants, 547 identified as cisgender/heterosexual and 104 identified as LGBTQ+. More cisgender/heterosexual residents either had/were planning on having children during residency compared with their LGBTQ+ peers (40.6% vs. 13.5%). Despite no differences in infertility diagnoses, LGBTQ+ respondents were more likely to use gestational carriers (23.1% vs. 3.1%), in vitro fertilization (IVF) (39.4% vs. 24.5%), sperm cryopreservation (14.4% vs. 7.9%), gamete donation (12.5% vs. 1.6%), or reciprocal IVF (5.8% vs. 0.9%) compared with their peers who were more unsure about reproductive services they would use (32.7% vs. 50.5%). LGBTQ+ residents have more barriers to reproductive services (mean 1.67 [SD 1.4] vs. 1.37 [SD 1.4]), including cost (61.5% vs. 50.8%) and relationship status (20.2% vs. 7.5%) compared with their counterparts to whom some barriers were not applicable (41.3% vs. 52.3%). All respondents reported similar rates of program support and distress about family building. Only 9.1% of all respondents had received educational lectures about relevant family-building options, and 80.2% believe that their graduate medical education (GME) should offer more support. Conclusions: LGBTQ+ residents report a lack of information and resources for family building during residency training, but many report a desire to engage in family building despite cost and relationship status barriers. More than half of medical residents indicate the need for reproductive services. Increased education and support regarding family-building services during training is needed to expand access to all residents, including LGBTQ+ residents.
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.