"Focus more on what's right instead of what's wrong:" research priorities identified by a sample of transgender and gender diverse community health center patients.

BACKGROUND: Transgender and gender diverse (TGD) individuals disproportionately experience disparate health outcomes compared to their cisgender peers. This study aimed to collect qualitative data from a sample of TGD community health center patients on health research priorities to inform future TGD-centered research in the field of TGD health. METHODS: Between September-November of 2018, four focus groups (two groups in Boston MA, two in New York NY; n = 28 individuals) were held to evaluate community-identified TGD health research priorities with a sample of patients from two community health centers. Thematic analyses were conducted and restricted to social factors impacting health. Findings were incorporated into the development of The LEGACY Project, a longitudinal cohort of TGD patients, assessing the impact of gender-affirming care on health outcomes. RESULTS: Cross-cutting themes about TGD research priorities pertaining to social factors and health included: (1) Embodiment: understanding and investigating the complex and intersectional lived experiences of TGD individuals; (2) Social determinants of health: the impact of structural and interpersonal stigma on TGD health; and (3) Resiliency and health promoting factors: the need to expand public health research beyond disparities to assess resiliency and health promotion in TGD communities. CONCLUSIONS: Participants identified investigating the impact of social influences on health as a research priority for TGD patients. Recalibrating field norms from individual researcher priorities to TGD population-driven research will help ensure investigators address topics that may otherwise be missed or overlooked and may optimize the reach and impact of research in TGD health.

Patient-centered practices for engaging transgender and gender diverse patients in clinical research studies.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this formative study was to assess barriers and facilitators to participation of transgender and gender diverse (TGD) patients in clinical research to solicit specific feedback on perceived acceptability and feasibility of research methods to inform creation of a multisite longitudinal cohort of primary care patients engaged in care at two community health centers. METHOD: Between September-November 2018, four focus groups (FGs) were convened at two community health centers in Boston, MA and New York, NY (N = 28 participants across all 4 groups; 11 in Boston and 17 in New York). FG guides asked about patient outreach, acceptability of study methods and measures, and ideas for study retention. FGs were facilitated by TGD study staff, lasted approximately 90 min in duration, were audio recorded, and then transcribed verbatim by a professional transcription service. Thematic analyses were conducted by two independent analysts applying a constant comparison method. Consistency and consensus were achieved across code creation and application aided by Dedoose software. RESULTS: Participants were a mean age of 33.9 years (SD 12.3; Range 18-66). Participants varied in gender identity with 4 (14.3%) men, 3 (10.7%) women, 8 (28.6%) transgender men, 10 (35.7%) transgender women, and 3 (10.7%) nonbinary. Eight (26.6%) were Latinx, 5 (17.9%) Black, 3 (10.7%) Asian, 3 (10.7%) another race, and 5 (17.9%) multiracial. Motivators and facilitators to participation were: research creating community, research led by TGD staff, compensation, research integrated into healthcare, research applicable to TGD and non-TGD people, and research helping TGD communities. Barriers were: being research/healthcare averse, not identifying as TGD, overlooking questioning individuals, research coming from a 'cisgender lens", distrust of how the research will be used, research not being accessible to TGD people, and research being exploitative. CONCLUSION: Though similarities emerged between the perspectives of TGD people and research citing perspectives of other underserved populations, there are barriers and facilitators to research which are unique to TGD populations. It is important for TGD people to be involved as collaborators in all aspects of research that concerns them.

Addressing LGBTQ Student Bullying in Massachusetts Schools: Perspectives of LGBTQ Students and School Health Professionals.

Lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer/questioning (LGBTQ) youth face disparities in bullying victimization are associated with higher rates of physical injury, psychological distress, and even suicide. Innovative strategies to address bullying victimization are needed to prevent adverse physical and mental health outcomes, including those engaging school health professionals (SHPs; school nurses, psychologists). This mixed-methods study sought to identify factors that facilitate or impede SHPs' reporting and responding to LGBTQ bullying in Massachusetts from the perspectives of LGBTQ students and SHPs. Between August 2017 and July 2018, asynchronous online focus group discussions and a brief survey were conducted separately for 28 LGBTQ students and 19 SHPs in Massachusetts (9-12 participants per group; n = 47 enrolled). Focus groups probed on bullying experiences. Rapid qualitative inquiry was used for thematic coding of facilitators and barriers to address LGBTQ student bullying described by youth and SHPs. Facilitators and barriers largely coalesced around the social ecological model. Youth and SHPs identified factors at multiple levels of the social ecological model: (1) individual (knowledge, skills, attitudes); (2) interpersonal (trust and follow-through, confidentiality and fear of being "outed," close relationships, champion SHPs); and (3) structural (school buy-in, time, reporting and protocols, staff roles, resources, and school culture of inclusivity). LGBTQ students expressed a need for an intersectional lens for SHPs when addressing LGBTQ student bullying. Interventions that help SHPs overcome multilevel barriers and leverage facilitators are needed. Consideration of intersectionality will better equip SHPs to support LGBTQ students and address disparities in LGBTQ student bullying that confer health risks.

LGBTQ Student Health: A Mixed-Methods Study of Unmet Needs in Massachusetts Schools.

BACKGROUND: Lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer and questioning (LGBTQ) youth experience poor physical and mental health outcomes relative to their non-LGBTQ peers. School health professionals (SHPs), such as school nurses, play a key role in addressing LGBTQ student health needs. However, few studies examine school health needs of LGBTQ students from both the youth and SHP perspective. METHODS: From August 2017 to July 2018, 28 LGBTQ youth and 19 SHPs (N = 47) in Massachusetts participated in online focus groups and a brief survey on school health needs and experiences. Qualitative themes were coded using Rapid Qualitative Inquiry principles and NVIVO. RESULTS: Both LGBTQ students and SHPs identified an urgent need for inclusive sexual education and mental health services. LGBTQ students raised access to safer bathrooms, information, and guidance on gender transitioning, and access to safe spaces as school-based needs. Missing from SHPs' perspectives, students also discussed sexual violence/harassment of transgender students and racism impacting youth of color. CONCLUSIONS: LGBTQ students, especially transgender students and LGBTQ youth of color, have unmet health needs that need to be addressed. Recognizing these needs is the first step towards inclusive health services and support for all students in schools. Next, interventions to increase the capacity of SHPs to address LGBTQ student health are necessary.

Situated Vulnerabilities, Sexual Risk, and Sexually Transmitted Infections' Diagnoses in a Sample of Transgender Youth in the United States.

In the United States, sexually transmitted infections (STIs) confer significant morbidity in adolescents and young adults. STIs are not well characterized in transgender and other gender minority youth (TGMY) who have a gender identity that differs from the sex assigned to them at birth. This study sought to fill this gap. In 2015-2016, the Adolescent Medicine Trials Network for HIV/AIDS Interventions conducted Protocol 130, Affirming Voices for Action, enrolling a diverse sample of TGMY 16-24 years of age from 14 US geographic locations. Multivariable analyses regressed lifetime STI diagnosis on "situated vulnerabilities" (demographics, social/economic issues, mental/behavioral health conditions, and health care experience). Approximately one-third were living with HIV infection (31%); 33% had a history of one or more STIs, excluding HIV. The most frequently diagnosed STIs were 55% chlamydia, 48% syphilis, and 47% gonorrhea. The odds of STI was 4.06 times higher for trans feminine youth assigned a male sex at birth compared to trans masculine youth assigned a female sex at birth (p = 0.03). Additional risk factors for lifetime STI were as follows: nonbinary gender identity (p = 0.004), medical gender affirmation (p = 0.03), and transactional sex (p = 0.01). Nearly one-third (31%) reported condomless vaginal and/or anal sex in the last 6 months, suggesting a need for ongoing STI prevention, screening, diagnosis, and treatment. TGMY are a vulnerable group to STIs in need of public health attention. Clinical care for STIs will benefit from considering risk factors facing youth in general (e.g., sex work), alongside those vulnerabilities unique to TGMY (e.g., medical gender affirmation).