Examining the Lesbian, Gay, and Bisexual Identity Scale Among Members of an Alternative Sexuality Special Interest Group.

The present study contributes to a growing body of literature developing psychometrically and theoretically grounded measures of sexual orientation minority identity. We tested psychometric properties and construct validity of a 27-item measure, the Lesbian, Gay, and Bisexual Identity Scale (LGBIS). The sample consisted of 475 adult (178 male, 237 female, 16 male-to-female, 14 female-to-male, and 30 gender queer persons) members of a special interest group, the National Coalition for Sexual Freedom. Participants completed a health needs questionnaire. Prominent findings included (1) confirmatory factor-analytic, internal consistency, and inter-correlation patterns support two LGBIS factor structures; (2) men, compared primarily to women, reported elevated scores on Acceptance Concerns, Concealment Motivation, Difficulty Process, and Negative Identity; (3) queer-identifying persons tended to report low Concealment Motivation, and high Identity Affirmation and Identity Centrality scores; (4) experimenting/fluid-identifying individuals tended toward higher Identity Uncertainty and Negative Identity, and lower Identity Centrality scores; (5) LGB community involvement was negatively associated with Concealment Motivation, Identity Uncertainty, and Negative Identity, and positively associated with Identity Superiority, Identity Affirmation, and Identity Centrality scores; and (6) Acceptance Concerns, Identity Uncertainty, and Internalized Homonegativity displayed significant positive associations with such mental health symptoms as general anxiety and posttraumatic stress. The LGBIS represents a useful approach to evaluating sexual orientation minority identity. Implications for identity theory, research, and practice are provided.

Investing in a surgical outcomes auditing system.

Background. Humanitarian surgical organizations consider both quantity of patients receiving care and quality of the care provided as a measure of success. However, organizational efficacy is often judged by the percent of resources spent towards direct intervention/surgery, which may discourage investment in an outcomes monitoring system. Operation Smile's established Global Standards of Care mandate minimum patient followup and quality of care. Purpose. To determine whether investment of resources in an outcomes monitoring system is necessary and effectively measures success. Methods. This paper analyzes the quantity and completeness of data collected over the past four years and compares it against changes in personnel and resources assigned to the program. Operation Smile began investing in multiple resources to obtain the missing data necessary to potentially implement a global Surgical Outcomes Auditing System. Existing personnel resources were restructured to focus on postoperative program implementation, data acquisition and compilation, and training materials used to educate local foundation and international employees. Results. An increase in the number of postoperative forms and amount of data being submitted to headquarters occurred. Conclusions. Humanitarian surgical organizations would benefit from investment in a surgical outcomes monitoring system in order to demonstrate success and to ameliorate quality of care.