ArticlePublic health nursing (Boston, Mass.)
Access of the LGBTQIA+ Population to Brazilian Public Primary Health Care Services: A Scoping Review.
Article in Public health nursing (Boston, Mass.). 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundLGBTQIA+ individuals in Brazil face persistent inequities in accessing Primary Health Care (PHC), largely due to structural barriers, institutional discrimination, and limited professional training. Despite the existence of the National Policy for Integral LGBT Health, significant challenges remain in ensuring inclusive and equitable care.
objectiveTo map the available scientific evidence regarding the access of the LGBTQIA+ population to Brazilian public PHC services, identifying barriers, facilitators, and research gaps.
methodThis scoping review followed the JBI framework and PRISMA-ScR guidelines. Searches were conducted in MEDLINE/PubMed, Embase, Scopus, CINAHL, SciELO, LILACS for studies published between 2018 and 2023.
resultsA total of 19 studies were included, predominantly qualitative (84.2%) and concentrated in the Northeast and Southeast regions, with no studies from the Central-West. Most investigations prioritized healthcare professionals' perspectives, particularly nurses and physicians, while the experiences of LGBTQIA+ users remained underrepresented. Barriers to access included institutional prejudice, lack of professional preparedness, and a narrow biomedical focus on HIV/aids. Facilitators involved social support networks, and the search for inclusive spaces. Research gaps persist, particularly regarding dissident gender identities.
conclusionStrengthening inclusive policies, diversifying scientific production, and integrating sexual and gender diversity into professional training are essential to promoting equity and improving health outcomes.
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.