Advancing genomics to improve health equity.

Health equity is the state in which everyone has fair and just opportunities to attain their highest level of health. The field of human genomics has fallen short in increasing health equity, largely because the diversity of the human population has been inadequately reflected among participants of genomics research. This lack of diversity leads to disparities that can have scientific and clinical consequences. Achieving health equity related to genomics will require greater effort in addressing inequities within the field. As part of the commitment of the National Human Genome Research Institute (NHGRI) to advancing health equity, it convened experts in genomics and health equity research to make recommendations and performed a review of current literature to identify the landscape of gaps and opportunities at the interface between human genomics and health equity research. This Perspective describes these findings and examines health equity within the context of human genomics and genomic medicine.

Health status of transgender people globally: A systematic review of research on disease burden and correlates.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Transgender and gender diverse (trans) health research has grown rapidly, highlighting the need to characterize the scientific evidence base. We conducted a systematic review of peer-reviewed research on disease burden and correlates in trans adolescents and adults over a 20-month period to identify knowledge gaps and assess methodological characteristics including measurement of gender identity, community engagement, and study quality. DATA SOURCES, ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA, AND SYNTHESIS METHODS: We searched seven databases using terms related to (a) transgender populations and (b) health or disease. Eligible studies were in English, French, or Spanish and reported original quantitative data on mental health or substance use conditions, infectious diseases, or non-communicable conditions in at least 25 trans individuals aged 15+. Quality assessment was performed in duplicate on a 10% sample of articles and findings were summarized using narrative synthesis. RESULTS: The 328 included studies were conducted in 45 countries, with most from North America (54%) and limited research from South Asia (3%), Sub-Saharan Africa (3%), and the Middle East and North Africa (2%). Most studies used cross-sectional designs (73%) and convenience sampling (65%). Only 30% of studies reported any form of community engagement. Mental health and substance use disorders were the most studied area (77% of studies) and non-communicable conditions the least (16%). Available data indicated that trans populations experience high disease burden with considerable heterogeneity within and across settings. Of 39 articles assessed for quality, 80% were rated as fair, 18% as poor, and 3% as good quality. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: Geographic, gender-specific, and topical gaps remain in trans health, but we found more research from African countries, with transmasculine people, and on non-communicable conditions than previous syntheses. Areas for growth in trans health research include community engagement, non-binary health, chronic and age-related conditions, and health determinants. REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42021234043.

First They Came for Us All: Responding to Anti-Transgender Structural Violence With Collective, Community-Engaged, and Intersectional Health Equity Research and Advocacy.

This article is a call for collective action across health equity researchers and advocates to build a more just world. We attempt to make sense of senseless structural and interpersonal brutality in the context of the current political climate across the United States, whereby the spectrum of gender nonconformity has been and continues to be stigmatized. From drag performance to transgender identities to gender-affirming health care, extremists have instrumentalized primary levers of democracy-the courts, legislatures, and social media-to attempt to outlaw and eradicate gender expansiveness and those who provide forms of support and care, including gender-affirming medical care, to transgender, nonbinary, and gender-expansive (TNBGE) individuals.

State-level heterogeneity in associations between structural stigma and individual health care access: A multilevel analysis of transgender adults in the United States.

OBJECTIVE: State-level variation in how restrictive policies affect health care access for transgender populations has not been widely studied. Therefore, we assessed the association between structural stigma and four measures of individual health care access among transgender people in the United States, and the extent to which structural stigma explains state-level variability. METHODS: Data were drawn from the 2015-2019 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System and the Human Rights Campaign's State Equality Index. We calculated weighted proportions and conducted multilevel logistic regression of individual heterogeneity and discriminatory accuracy. RESULTS: An increase in the structural stigma score by one standard deviation was associated with lower odds of health care coverage (OR = 0.80; 95% CI: 0.66, 0.96) after adjusting for individual-level confounders. Approximately 11% of the total variance for insurance coverage was attributable to the state level; however, only 18% of state-level variability was explained by structural stigma. Adding Medicaid expansion attenuated the structural stigma-insurance association and explained 22% of state-level variation in health insurance. For the remaining outcomes (usual source of care, routine medical check-up, and cost-related barriers), we found neither meaningful associations nor considerable between-state variability. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings support the importance of Medicaid expansion and transgender-inclusive antidiscrimination protections to enhance health care insurance coverage. From a measurement perspective, however, additional research is needed to develop and validate measures of transgender-specific structural stigma to guide future policy interventions.

Will clinical standards not be part of the choir? Harmonization between the HL7 gender harmony project model and the NASEM measuring sex, gender identity, and sexual orientation report in the United States.

OBJECTIVES: To propose an approach for semantic and functional data harmonization related to sex and gender constructs in electronic health records (EHRs) and other clinical systems for implementors, as outlined in the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine (NASEM) report Measuring Sex, Gender Identity, and Sexual Orientation and the Health Level 7 (HL7) Gender Harmony Project (GHP) product brief "Gender Harmony-Modeling Sex and Gender Representation, Release 1." MATERIALS AND METHODS: Authors from both publications contributed to a plan for data harmonization based upon fundamental principles in informatics, including privacy, openness, access, legitimate infringement, least intrusive alternatives, and accountability. RESULTS: We propose construct entities and value sets that best align with both publications to allow the implementation of EHR data elements on gender identity, recorded sex or gender, and sex for clinical use in the United States. We include usability- and interoperability-focused reasoning for each of these decisions, as well as suggestions for cross-tabulation for populations. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION: Both publications agree on core approaches to conceptualization and measurement of sex- and gender-related constructs. However, some clarifications could improve our ability to assess gender modality, alignment (or lack thereof) between gender identity and assigned gender at birth, and address both individual-level and population-level health inequities. By bridging the GHP and NASEM recommendations, we provide a path forward for implementation of sex- and gender-related EHR elements. Suggestions for implementation of gender identity, recorded sex or gender, and sex for clinical use are provided, along with semantic and functional justifications.

Health and Health Care Among Transgender Adults in the United States.

Transgender (trans) communities in the USA and globally have long organized for health and social equity but have only recently gained increased visibility within public health. In this review, we synthesize evidence demonstrating that trans adults in the USA are affected by disparities in physical and mental health and in access to health care, relative to cisgender (nontrans) persons. We draw on theory and data to situate these disparities in their social contexts, explicating the roles of gender affirmation, multilevel and intersectional stigmas, and public policies in reproducing or ameliorating trans health disparities. Until recently, trans health disparities were largely made invisible by exclusionary data collection practices. We highlight the importance of, and methodological considerations for, collecting inclusive sex and gender data. Moving forward, we recommend routine collection of gender identity data, an emphasis on intervention research to achieve trans health equity, public policy advocacy, and investment in supporting gender-diverse public health leadership.

The Affordable Care Act and Its Impact on Plastic and Gender-Affirmation Surgery.

SUMMARY: The Affordable Care Act's provisions have affected and will continue to affect plastic surgeons and their patients, and an understanding of its influence on the current American health care system is essential. The law's impact on pediatric plastic surgery, craniofacial surgery, and breast reconstruction is well documented. In addition, gender-affirmation surgery has seen exponential growth, largely because of expanded insurance coverage through the protections afforded to transgender individuals by the Affordable Care Act. As gender-affirming surgery continues to grow, plastic surgeons have the opportunity to adapt and diversify their practices.

Intersectionality and Health Inequities for Gender Minority Blacks in the U.S.

INTRODUCTION: Gender minority blacks represent the intersection of multiply marginalized populations that experience severe health inequities in the U.S. However, few studies focus on the unique health experiences of this multiply disadvantaged population. This study quantifies the health inequities experienced by gender minority blacks in the U.S. using an intersectional framework. METHODS: This cross-sectional study analyzed data in 2018/2019 from the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System, including all cisgender black, gender minority black, and gender minority white survey respondents who completed the gender identity module between 2014 and 2018. Investigators compared demographics, healthcare access, behavioral risk factors, chronic conditions, and perceived health status of gender minority blacks with those of cisgender blacks and gender minority whites. RESULTS: In the primary analysis of weighted survey data, gender minority blacks were more likely to report experiencing severe mental distress (AOR=1.99, 95% CI=1.14, 3.47, p=0.02), longer periods of being physically or mentally unwell (adjusted RR=1.36, 95% CI=1.17, 1.59, p<0.001), and longer periods of activity limitations owing to poor health (adjusted RR=1.53, 95% CI=1.01, 1.41, p=0.003) than cisgender blacks. In a matched analysis, gender minority blacks had worse self-reported health than both cisgender blacks (OR=1.32, 95%: CI=1.05, 1.67, p=0.02) and gender minority whites (OR=1.53, 95% CI=1.15, 2.04, p=0.003). CONCLUSIONS: Gender minority blacks have health experiences that are distinct from those of both the cisgender black and gender minority populations with which they intersect. Health policies and programs, including data collection efforts, must specifically consider this multiply marginalized population to effectively advance health equity.