Interest in over-the-counter progestin-only pills among transgender, nonbinary, and gender-expansive individuals in the United States.

BACKGROUND: In July 2023, the US Food and Drug Administration approved the first nonprescription oral contraceptive, a progestin-only pill, in the United States. Transgender, nonbinary, and gender-expansive people assigned female or intersex at birth face substantial contraceptive access barriers and may benefit from over-the-counter oral contraceptive access. However, no previous research has explored their perspectives on this topic. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to measure interest in over-the-counter progestin-only pill use among transgender, nonbinary, and gender-expansive individuals assigned female or intersex at birth. STUDY DESIGN: We conducted an online, cross-sectional survey from May to September 2019 (before the US Food and Drug Administration approval of a progestin-only pill) among a convenience sample of transgender, nonbinary, and gender-expansive people assigned female or intersex at birth who were aged 18 to 49 years from across the United States. Using descriptive statistics and logistic regression analyses, we estimated interest in over-the-counter progestin-only pill use (our outcome) overall and by sociodemographic and reproductive health characteristics (our exposures). We evaluated separate logistic regression models for each exposure. In each model, we included the minimally sufficient adjustment set to control for confounding pathways between the exposure and outcome. For the model for age, we ran a univariable logistic regression model; for all other exposures, we ran multivariable logistic regression models. RESULTS: Among 1415 participants in our sample (median age, 26 years), 45.0% (636/1415; 95% confidence interval, 42.3-47.6) were interested in over-the-counter progestin-only pill use. In separate logistic regression models for each exposure, there were higher odds of interest among participants who were aged 18 to 24 years (odds ratio, 1.67; 95% confidence interval, 1.33-2.10; vs those aged 25-34 years), those who were uninsured (adjusted odds ratio, 1.91; 95% confidence interval, 1.24-2.93; vs insured), those who currently used oral contraceptives (adjusted odds ratio, 1.69; 95% confidence interval, 1.17-2.44; vs non-users), had ≤high school degree (adjusted odds ratio, 3.02; 95% confidence interval, 1.94-4.71; vs college degree), had ever used progestin-only pills (adjusted odds ratio, 2.32; 95% confidence interval, 1.70-3.17; vs never users), and who wanted to avoid estrogen generally (adjusted odds ratio, 1.32; 95% confidence interval, 1.04-1.67; vs those who did not want to avoid estrogen generally) or specifically because they viewed it as a feminizing hormone (adjusted odds ratio, 1.72; 95% confidence interval, 1.36-2.19; vs those who did not want to avoid estrogen because they viewed it as a feminizing hormone). There were lower odds of interest among participants with a graduate or professional degree (adjusted odds ratio, 0.70; 95% confidence interval, 0.51-0.96; vs college degree), those who were sterilized (adjusted odds ratio, 0.31; 95% confidence interval, 0.12-0.79; vs not sterilized), and those who had ever used testosterone for gender affirmation (adjusted odds ratio, 0.72; 95% confidence interval, 0.57-0.90; vs never users). CONCLUSION: Transgender, nonbinary, and gender-expansive individuals were interested in over-the-counter progestin-only pill use, and its availability has the potential to improve contraceptive access for this population.

Family building and pregnancy experiences of cisgender sexual minority women.

BACKGROUND: Although 10% to 20% of cisgender women aged 18 to 40 years have a sexual minority identity (eg, bisexual, lesbian, and queer), there is limited research on the family building and pregnancy experiences of sexual minority cisgender women. Improving our understanding of the family building and pregnancy experiences of cisgender sexual minority women is critical for improving the perinatal health of this population. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to compare the mode of family building, past pregnancy experiences, and future pregnancy intentions among cisgender sexual minority women by sexual orientation. STUDY DESIGN: This is an observational study which was conducted using cross-sectional data collected in 2019 from a national sample of 1369 cisgender sexual minority women aged 18 to 45 years. RESULTS: Most participants (n=794, 58%) endorsed multiple sexual orientations, most commonly queer (n=641, 47%), lesbian (n=640, 47%), and/or bisexual (n=583, 43%). There were 243 (18%) cisgender sexual minority women who were parents. Pregnancy was used by 74% (181/243) of women to build their families. Among participants who used pregnancy, 60% (108/181) became pregnant through sexual activity with another parent of the child, whereas 27% (64/243) of women used donor sperm. An additional 10% (n=24) became parents through second-parent adoption, 10% (n=25) through adoption, and 14% (n=35) through step-parenting. Bisexual women more often used sexual activity to become parents (61/100, 61%) compared with queer (40/89, 45%) and lesbian women (40/130, 31%). In contrast, lesbian (50/130, 39%) and queer (25/89, 27%) women more often used donor sperm to become parents compared with bisexual women (11/100, 11%). Among the 266 (19%) cisgender sexual minority women who had ever been pregnant, there were 545 pregnancies (mean, 2.05 pregnancies per woman). Among those pregnancies, 59% (n=327) resulted in live birth, 23% (n=126) resulted in miscarriage, 15% (n=83) resulted in abortion, and 2% (n=9) resulted in ectopic pregnancy. A quarter of women had future pregnancy intentions, with no differences by sexual orientation. Overall, few participants (16%) reported that all of their healthcare providers were aware of their sexual orientation. CONCLUSION: Cisgender sexual minority women primarily built their families through pregnancy and a quarter have future pregnancy desires. In addition, there were important differences in family building methods used by sexual orientation. Providers should be aware of the pregnancy and family-building patterns, plans, and needs of cisgender sexual minority women.

Community-generated solutions to cancer inequity: recommendations from transgender, non-binary and intersex people on improving cancer screening and care.

Objective: Transgender, non-binary and intersex people are less likely to receive appropriate cancer screening for their bodies and have a higher incidence of certain cancers than cisgender people. We aimed to elicit community-generated solutions to improve cancer screening for these populations. Methods and analysis: We conducted six online, asynchronous focus groups in English and Spanish with transgender, non-binary, intersex and cisgender participants who were at least 15 years of age from across the USA. Participants shared their experiences with cancer screening and related conversations with healthcare providers and recommendations for making screening practices more inclusive of their bodies and experiences. Focus group data were exported into transcripts and analysed with thematic analysis. Results: The 23 participants represented a diversity of races, genders, sexualities, ages and geographical locations. Transgender, non-binary and intersex participants, particularly Black, Indigenous and/or people of colour, reported having to self-advocate to receive necessary care by initiating conversations about screening with their providers, requesting specific screenings and educating providers about the appropriate care for their body. Notably, no white or cisgender participants described having to request relevant screenings or initiate conversations with their providers. Participants recommended that forms ask about body parts and allow for self-identification. Conclusion: The ability to properly screen patients can have a direct impact on cancer outcomes. More inclusive intake forms may alleviate the need for transgender, non-binary and intersex patients to self-advocate to receive necessary care. More work should be done to educate providers on cancer risk for transgender, non-binary and intersex individuals.

Reports of Negative Interactions with Healthcare Providers among Transgender, Nonbinary, and Gender-Expansive People assigned Female at Birth in the United States: Results from an Online, Cross-Sectional Survey.

Over one million people in the United States are transgender, nonbinary, or gender expansive (TGE). TGE individuals, particularly those who have pursued gender-affirming care, often need to disclose their identities in the process of seeking healthcare. Unfortunately, TGE individuals often report negative experiences with healthcare providers (HCPs). We conducted a cross-sectional online survey of 1684 TGE people assigned female or intersex at birth in the United States to evaluate the quality of their healthcare experiences. Most respondents (70.1%, n = 1180) reported at least one negative interaction with an HCP in the past year, ranging from an unsolicited harmful opinion about gender identity to physical attacks and abuse. In an adjusted logistic regression model, those who had pursued gender-affirming medical care (51.9% of the sample, n = 874) had 8.1 times the odds (95% CI: 4.1-17.1) of reporting any negative interaction with an HCP in the past year, compared to those who had not pursued gender-affirming care, and tended to report a higher number of such negative interactions. These findings suggest that HCPs are failing to create safe, high-quality care interactions for TGE populations. Improving care quality and reducing bias is crucial for improving the health and well-being of TGE people.

Recruiting foreign-born individuals who have sought an abortion in the United States: Lessons from a feasibility study.

Although studies have documented challenges people encounter when attempting to access abortion care in the United States, there is little research on the perspectives and experiences of foreign-born individuals, who may encounter unique barriers to accessing care. Since lack of data may be due to difficulty recruiting this population, we explored the feasibility of using social media to recruit foreign-born individuals who have sought an abortion into interviews to share their abortion experiences. Our target population was limited to English and Spanish-speakers due to budget constraints. As this recruitment method was unsuccessful, we attempted to recruit our target population through the crowdsourcing website, Amazon Mechanical Turk (mTurk) to take a one-time survey on their abortion experience. Both online recruitment methods yielded a significant number of fraudulent responses. Although we aimed to collaborate with organizations that work closely with immigrant populations, they were unavailable to assist with recruitment efforts at the time of the study. Future abortion research utilizing online methods to recruit foreign-born populations should consider incorporating information on their target populations' use of online platforms as well as cultural views on abortion in order to develop effective recruitment strategies.

Building the foundation for a community-generated national research blueprint for inherited bleeding disorders: research to advance the health of people with inherited bleeding disorders with the potential to menstruate.

BACKGROUND: People who have or had the potential to menstruate (PPM) with inherited bleeding disorders (BD) face particular challenges receiving appropriate diagnosis and care and participating in research. As part of an initiative to create a National Research Blueprint for future decades of research, the National Hemophilia Foundation (NHF) and American Thrombosis and Hemostasis Network conducted extensive all-stakeholder consultations to identify the priorities of PPM with inherited BDs and those who care for them. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Working group (WG) 4 of the NHF State of the Science Research Summit distilled community-identified priorities for PPM with inherited BDs into concrete research questions and scored their feasibility, impact, and risk. RESULTS: WG4 identified important gaps in the foundational knowledge upon which to base optimal diagnosis and care for PPM with inherited BDs. They defined 44 top-priority research questions concerning lifespan sex biology, pregnancy and the post-partum context, uterine physiology and bleeding, bone and joint health, health care delivery, and patient-reported outcomes and quality-of-life. CONCLUSIONS: The needs of PPM will best be advanced with research designed across the spectrum of sex and gender biology, with methodologies and outcome measures tailored to this population, involving them throughout.

Up to 1% of cisgender women and girls have an inherited bleeding disorder (BD). Common symptoms include heavy menstrual bleeding (HMB), heavy bleeding after giving birth known as post-partum hemorrhage (PPH), nose bleeds, bleeding from the mouth, and excessive bleeding after surgery or procedures. They can also experience bleeding into their muscles, joints, and even into the brain. Uterine bleeding, such as from HMB and PPH, can impact the lives of anyone who has or had a uterus, a group we designate as people who have or had the potential to menstruate (PPM).Many PPM with an inherited BD do not receive diagnosis, treatment, and care needed due to a lack of expertise among health care professionals and the public, misunderstanding, and bias. Uncertainty about "normal" versus "abnormal" bleeding can contribute to a lack of diagnosis, treatment, and care. Language, such as the label of "carrier," can be a barrier to accessing treatment and care for PPM.People with inherited BDs, health care professionals with various expertise and focus, and researchers worked together to identify the research that would most improve the lives of PPM, in six focus areas where there are major gaps in knowledge and the lack of standards required for accurate diagnosis.

Abortion attempts without clinical supervision among transgender, nonbinary and gender-expansive people in the United States.

BACKGROUND: Transgender, nonbinary and gender-expansive (TGE) people face barriers to abortion care and may consider abortion without clinical supervision. METHODS: In 2019, we recruited participants for an online survey about sexual and reproductive health. Eligible participants were TGE people assigned female or intersex at birth, 18 years and older, from across the United States, and recruited through The PRIDE Study or via online and in-person postings. RESULTS: Of 1694 TGE participants, 76 people (36% of those ever pregnant) reported considering trying to end a pregnancy on their own without clinical supervision, and a subset of these (n=40; 19% of those ever pregnant) reported attempting to do so. Methods fell into four broad categories: herbs (n=15, 38%), physical trauma (n=10, 25%), vitamin C (n=8, 20%) and substance use (n=7, 18%). Reasons given for abortion without clinical supervision ranged from perceived efficiency and desire for privacy, to structural issues including a lack of health insurance coverage, legal restrictions, denials of or mistreatment within clinical care, and cost. CONCLUSIONS: These data highlight a high proportion of sampled TGE people who have attempted abortion without clinical supervision. This could reflect formidable barriers to facility-based abortion care as well as a strong desire for privacy and autonomy in the abortion process. Efforts are needed to connect TGE people with information on safe and effective methods of self-managed abortion and to dismantle barriers to clinical abortion care so that TGE people may freely choose a safe, effective abortion in either setting.

From 'Shark-Week' to 'Mangina': An Analysis of Words Used by People of Marginalized Sexual Orientations and/or Gender Identities to Replace Common Sexual and Reproductive Health Terms.

Purpose: To explore sexual and reproductive health (SRH)-related word-use among sexual and gender minority (SGM) individuals in the United States. Methods: In 2019, we fielded an online quantitative survey on the SRH experiences of SGM adults. Eligible participants included transgender, nonbinary, and gender-expansive (TGE) people assigned female or intersex at birth, and cisgender sexual minority women (CSMW) in the United States. The survey asked participants to indicate if they used each of nine SRH terms, and if not, to provide the word(s) they used. We analyzed patterns in replacement words provided by respondents and tested for differences by gender category with tests of proportions. Results: Among 1704 TGE and 1370 CSMW respondents, 613 (36%) TGE respondents and 92 (7%) CSMW respondents replaced at least 1 SRH term (p-for-difference <0.001). Many (23%) replacement words/phrases were entirely unique. For six out of the nine terms, TGE respondents indicated that use of the provided term would depend on the context, the term did not apply to them, or they did not have a replacement word/phrase that worked for them. Conclusions: SRH terms commonly used in clinical and research settings cause discomfort and dysphoria among some SGM individuals. To address inequities in access to and quality of SRH care among SGM individuals, and to overcome long standing fear of mistreatment in clinical settings, more intentional word-use and elicitation from providers and researchers could increase the quality and affirming nature of clinical and research experiences for SGM people.

Pregnancy intentions and outcomes among transgender, nonbinary, and gender-expansive people assigned female or intersex at birth in the United States: Results from a national, quantitative survey.

Background: Transgender, nonbinary, and gender-expansive (TGE) people experience pregnancy. Quantitative data about pregnancy intentions and outcomes of TGE people are needed to identify patterns in pregnancy intentions and outcomes and to inform clinicians how best to provide gender-affirming and competent pregnancy care. Aims: We sought to collect data on pregnancy intentions and outcomes among TGE people assigned female or intersex at birth in the United States. Methods: Collaboratively with a study-specific community advisory team, we designed a customizable, online survey to measure sexual and reproductive health experiences among TGE people. Eligible participants included survey respondents who identified as a man or within the umbrella of transgender, nonbinary, or gender-expansive identities; were 18 years or older; able to complete an electronic survey in English; lived in the United States; and were assigned female or intersex at birth. Participants were recruited through The PRIDE Study - a national, online, longitudinal cohort study of sexual and gender minority people - and externally via online social media postings, TGE community e-mail distribution lists, in-person TGE community events, and academic and community conferences. We conducted descriptive analyses of pregnancy-related outcomes and report frequencies overall and by racial and ethnic identity, pregnancy intention, or testosterone use. Results: Out of 1,694 eligible TGE respondents who provided reproductive history data, 210 (12%) had been pregnant. Of these, 115 (55%) had one prior pregnancy, 47 (22%) had two prior pregnancies, and 48 (23%) had three or more prior pregnancies. Of the 433 pregnancies, 169 (39%) resulted in live birth, 142 (33%) miscarried, 92 (21%) ended in abortion, two (0.5%) ended in stillbirth, two (0.5%) had an ectopic pregnancy, and seven (2%) were still pregnant; nineteen pregnancies (4%) had an unknown outcome. Among live births, 39 (23%) were delivered via cesarean section. Across all pregnancies, 233 (54%) were unintended. Fifteen pregnancies occurred after initiation of testosterone, and four pregnancies occurred while taking testosterone. Among all participants, 186 (11%) wanted a future pregnancy, and 275 (16%) were unsure; 182 (11%) felt "at risk" for an unintended pregnancy. Discussion: TGE people in the United States plan for pregnancy, experience pregnancy (intended and unintended) and all pregnancy outcomes, and are engaged in family building. Sexual and reproductive health clinicians and counselors should avoid assumptions about pregnancy capacity or intentions based on a patient's presumed or stated gender or engagement with gender-affirming hormone therapy.

Abortion experiences and preferences of transgender, nonbinary, and gender-expansive people in the United States.

BACKGROUND: Transgender, nonbinary, and gender-expansive people who were assigned female or intersex at birth experience pregnancy and have abortions. Scarce data have been published on individual abortion experiences or preferences of this understudied population. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to fill existing evidence gaps on the abortion experiences and preferences of transgender, nonbinary, and gender-expansive people in the United States to inform policies and practices to improve access to and quality of abortion care for this population. STUDY DESIGN: In 2019, we recruited transgender, nonbinary, and gender-expansive people who were assigned female or intersex at birth at the age of ≥18 years from across the United States to participate in an online survey about sexual and reproductive health recruited through The Population Research in Identities and Disparities for Equality Study and online postings. We descriptively analyzed closed- and open-ended survey responses related to pregnancy history, abortion experiences, preferences for abortion method, recommendations to improve abortion care for transgender, nonbinary, and gender-expansive people, and respondent sociodemographic characteristics. RESULTS: Most of the 1694 respondents were <30 years of age. Respondents represented multiple gender identities and sexual orientations and resided across all 4 United States Census Regions. Overall, 210 respondents (12%) had ever been pregnant; these 210 reported 433 total pregnancies, of which 92 (21%) ended in abortion. For respondents' most recent abortion, 41 (61%) were surgical, 23 (34%) were medication, and 3 (5%) were another method (primarily herbal). Most recent abortions took place at ≤9 weeks' gestation (n=41, 61%). If they were to need an abortion today, respondents preferred medication abortion over surgical abortion in a 3:1 ratio (n=703 vs n=217), but 514 respondents (30%) did not know which method they would prefer. The reasons for medication abortion preference among the 703 respondents included a belief that it is the least invasive method (n=553, 79%) and the most private method (n=388, 55%). To improve accessibility and quality of abortion care for transgender, nonbinary, and gender-expansive patients, respondents most frequently recommended that abortion clinics adopt gender-neutral or gender-affirming intake forms, that providers use gender-neutral language, and that greater privacy be incorporated into the clinic. CONCLUSION: These data contribute substantially to the evidence base on individual experiences of and preferences for abortion care for transgender, nonbinary, and gender-expansive people. Findings can be used to adapt abortion care to better include and affirm the experiences of this underserved population.