IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/jocnur/v25y2016i23-24p3628-3642.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Quantitative and mixed analyses to identify factors that affect cervical cancer screening uptake among lesbian and bisexual women and transgender men

Author

Listed:
  • Michael J Johnson
  • Martina Mueller
  • Michele J Eliason
  • Gail Stuart
  • Lynne S Nemeth

Abstract

Aims and objectives The purposes of this study were to measure the prevalence of, and identify factors associated with, cervical cancer screening among a sample of lesbian, bisexual and queer women, and transgender men. Background Past research has found that lesbian, bisexual and queer women underuse cervical screening service. Because deficient screening remains the most significant risk factor for cervical cancer, it is essential to understand the differences between routine and nonroutine screeners. Design A convergent‐parallel mixed methods design. Methods A convenience sample of 21‐ to 65‐year‐old lesbian and bisexual women and transgender men were recruited in the USA from August–December 2014. Quantitative data were collected via a 48‐item Internet questionnaire (N = 226), and qualitative data were collected through in‐depth telephone interviews (N = 20) and open‐ended questions on the Internet questionnaire. Results Seventy‐three per cent of the sample was routine cervical screeners. The results showed that a constellation of factors influence the use of cervical cancer screening among lesbian, bisexual and queer women. Some of those factors overlap with the general female population, whereas others are specific to the lesbian, bisexual or queer identity. Routine screeners reported feeling more welcome in the health care setting, while nonroutine screeners reported more discrimination related to their sexual orientation and gender expression. Routine screeners were also more likely to ‘out’ to their provider. The quantitative and qualitative factors were also compared and contrasted. Conclusions Many of the factors identified in this study to influence cervical cancer screening relate to the health care environment and to interactions between the patient and provider. Relevance to clinical practice Nurses should be involved with creating welcoming environments for lesbian, bisexual and queer women and their partners. Moreover, nurses play a large role in patient education and should promote self‐care behaviours among lesbian women and transgender men.

Suggested Citation

  • Michael J Johnson & Martina Mueller & Michele J Eliason & Gail Stuart & Lynne S Nemeth, 2016. "Quantitative and mixed analyses to identify factors that affect cervical cancer screening uptake among lesbian and bisexual women and transgender men," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 25(23-24), pages 3628-3642, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:wly:jocnur:v:25:y:2016:i:23-24:p:3628-3642
    DOI: 10.1111/jocn.13414
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/jocn.13414
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/jocn.13414?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Agénor, M. & Krieger, N. & Austin, S.B. & Haneuse, S. & Gottlieb, B.R., 2014. "Sexual orientation disparitiesin papanicolaou test use among US women: The role of sexual and reproductive health services," American Journal of Public Health, American Public Health Association, vol. 104(2), pages 68-73.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Christopher S. Carpenter & Gilbert Gonzales Jr. & Tara McKay & Dario Sansone, 2020. "Effects of the Affordable Care Act Dependent Coverage Mandate on Health Insurance Coverage for Individuals in Same-Sex Couples," NBER Working Papers 26978, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    2. Alexa L. Solazzo & Bridget K. Gorman & Justin T. Denney, 2017. "Cancer Screening Utilization Among U.S. Women: How Mammogram and Pap Test Use Varies Among Heterosexual, Lesbian, and Bisexual Women," Population Research and Policy Review, Springer;Southern Demographic Association (SDA), vol. 36(3), pages 357-377, June.
    3. Agénor, Madina & Krieger, Nancy & Austin, S. Bryn & Haneuse, Sebastien & Gottlieb, Barbara R., 2014. "At the intersection of sexual orientation, race/ethnicity, and cervical cancer screening: Assessing Pap test use disparities by sex of sexual partners among black, Latina, and white U.S. women," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 116(C), pages 110-118.
    4. Ijeoma Opara & Jasmine A. Abrams & Kristina Cross & Ndidiamaka Amutah-Onukagha, 2021. "Reframing Sexual Health for Black Girls and Women in HIV/STI Prevention Work: Highlighting the Role of Identity and Interpersonal Relationships," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(22), pages 1-14, November.
    5. Ssirai Kim & Sun-Young Lee & Smi Choi-Kwon, 2020. "Cervical Cancer Screening and Human Papillomavirus Vaccination among Korean Sexual Minority Women by Sex of Their Sexual Partners," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(23), pages 1-11, November.
    6. Ning Hsieh & Deirdre Shires & Hui Liu & Sam Safford & Kryssia J. Campos, 2024. "Unequal Access to Primary Care Providers at the Intersection of Race/Ethnicity, Sexual Orientation, and Gender," Population Research and Policy Review, Springer;Southern Demographic Association (SDA), vol. 43(4), pages 1-12, August.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wly:jocnur:v:25:y:2016:i:23-24:p:3628-3642. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1111/(ISSN)1365-2702 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.