ArticleSystematic reviews2025
A critical exploration of stigma interventions and programs for queer peoples across the life course in Canada: a scoping review protocol.
Article in Systematic reviews, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Abstract
backgroundQueer populations (sexual and gender diverse people, including two-spirit, lesbian, gay, bisexual, trans, and queer) in Canada face significant health disparities, largely driven by stigma related to sexual and gender identities. These inequities are associated with adverse health outcomes. Although a growing body of literature examines stigma reduction, interventions often focus on specific types of queer stigma rather than considering the broader, intersectional experiences of queer people. This scoping review aims to critically explore the current state of queer stigma across the life course in Canada, with an emphasis on understanding their impact, successes, and gaps.
methodsThis review will include studies that address interventions aimed at reducing queer-related stigma in Canada. Eligible studies must focus on queer populations and measure outcomes related to stigma reduction. Studies of any design (qualitative, quantitative, mixed methods), published in English or French, and from any year will be considered. A systematic search will be conducted across multiple databases, including Medline-R (Ovid), Embase (Ovid), APA PsycInfo (Ovid), CINAHL (EBSCO), Social Services Abstracts (ProQuest), Social Science Abstracts (ProQuest), and Social Science Citation Index (Web of Science), along with grey literature sources. Two reviewers will independently assess potential articles against the inclusion criteria through two stages: titles and abstracts as well as full-text screening. Data extraction will focus on study characteristics, intervention details, and outcomes related to stigma reduction. Findings will be reported in tables and narrative summaries, guided by the socioecological model and intersectional queer theories. Data will be analyzed to identify trends and gaps in current interventions aimed at addressing queer stigma. DISCUSSION: Using an intersectional queer approach and the socioecological model, this review will identify gaps and strengths in queer stigma programming and interventions across the life course. The broad inclusion criteria and a rigorous approach will account for academic and grey literature, highlighting ongoing treatments, measurement tools, and resources. This extensive data collection will inform future research on queer peoples' resource and programming needs in Canada. Findings will contribute to workshops development, training modules, and community reports for healthcare providers and community organizations serving queer communities. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.28523621.v1 .
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.