Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity Data Collection in Oncology Practice: Findings of an ASCO Survey

Author:

Kamen Charles S.1ORCID,Pratt-Chapman Mandi L.2ORCID,Meersman Stephen C.3,Quinn Gwendolyn P.4ORCID,Schabath Matthew B.5ORCID,Maingi Shail6ORCID,Merrill Janette K.3ORCID,Garrett-Mayer Elizabeth3ORCID,Kaltenbaugh Melinda3ORCID,Schenkel Caroline3ORCID,Chang Shine7ORCID

Affiliation:

1. University of Rochester Medical Center, Rochester, NY

2. Department of Medicine, GW Cancer Center, The George Washington University School of Medicine and Health Sciences, Washington, DC

3. American Society of Clinical Oncology, Alexandria, VA

4. Departments of OB-GYN, Population Health, Perlmutter Cancer Center, Grossman School of Medicine, New York University, New York City, NY

5. Department of Cancer Epidemiology, H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center and Research Institute, Tampa, FL

6. Dana-Farber/Brigham and Women's Cancer Center at South Shore Hospital, South Weymouth, MA

7. Division of Cancer Prevention and Population Sciences, Department of Epidemiology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX

Abstract

PURPOSE: Lack of collection of sexual orientation and gender identity (SOGI) data in oncology practices limits assessment of sexual and gender minority (SGM) cancer patients' experiences and restricts opportunities to improve health outcomes of SGM patients. Despite national calls for routine SOGI data collection, individual-level and institutional barriers hinder progress. This study aimed to identify these barriers in oncology. METHODS: An online survey of ASCO members and others assessed SOGI data collection in oncology practices, institutional characteristics related to SOGI data collection, respondents' attitudes about SOGI data and SGM patients, and respondent demographics. Logistic regression calculated adjusted odds ratios (ORs) and 95% CIs for factors associated with sexual orientation (SO) and gender identity (GI) data collection. RESULTS: Less than half of 257 respondents reported institutional SO and GI data collection (40% and 46%, respectively), whereas over a third reported no institutional data collection (34% and 32%, respectively) and the remainder were unsure (21% and 17%, respectively). Most respondents felt that knowing both SO and GI was important for quality care (77% and 85%, respectively). Collection of SO and GI was significantly associated in separate models with leadership support (ORs = 8.01 and 6.02, respectively), having resources for SOGI data collection (ORs = 10.6 and 18.7, respectively), and respondents' belief that knowing patient SO and GI is important (ORs = 4.28 and 2.76, respectively). Themes from qualitative comments mirrored the key factors identified in our quantitative analysis. CONCLUSION: Three self-reinforcing factors emerged as critical drivers for collecting SOGI data: leadership support, dedicated resources, and individual respondents' attitudes. Policy mandates, implementation science, and clinical reimbursement are strategies to advance meaningful data collection and use in clinical practice.

Publisher

American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO)

Subject

Oncology (nursing),Health Policy,Oncology

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3