Explore the vast range of titles available.

Given that an estimated 0.6% of the U.S. population is transgender (trans) and that large health disparities for this population have been documented, government and research organizations are increasingly expanding measures of sex/gender to be trans inclusive. Options suggested for trans community surveys, such as expansive check-all-that-apply gender identity lists and write-in options that offer maximum flexibility, are generally not appropriate for broad population surveys. These require limited questions and a small number of categories for analysis. Limited evaluation has been undertaken of trans-inclusive population survey measures for sex/gender, including those currently in use. Using an internet survey and follow-up of 311 participants, and cognitive interviews from a maximum-diversity sub-sample (n = 79), we conducted a mixed-methods evaluation of two existing measures: a two-step question developed in the United States and a multidimensional measure developed in Canada. We found very low levels of item missingness, and no indicators of confusion on the part of cisgender (non-trans) participants for both measures. However, a majority of interview participants indicated problems with each question item set. Agreement between the two measures in assessment of gender identity was very high (K = 0.9081), but gender identity was a poor proxy for other dimensions of sex or gender among trans participants. Issues to inform measure development or adaptation that emerged from analysis included dimensions of sex/gender measured, whether non-binary identities were trans, Indigenous and cultural identities, proxy reporting, temporality concerns, and the inability of a single item to provide a valid measure of sex/gender. Based on this evaluation, we recommend that population surveys meant for multi-purpose analysis consider a new Multidimensional Sex/Gender Measure for testing that includes three simple items (one asked only of a small sub-group) to assess gender identity and lived gender, with optional additions. We provide considerations for adaptation of this measure to different contexts.

Background Evidence suggests that transgender (trans) individuals in Canada are a medically underserved population; barriers range from lack of provider knowledge on trans issues to refusal of care. This paper provides the first formal estimation of health care inequalities between trans and cisgender individuals in Ontario, Canada. Methods Weighted statistics from the Ontario-wide Trans PULSE Project ( n  = 433) were compared with age-standardized Ontario data from the Canadian Community Health Survey ( n  = 39,980) to produce standardized prevalence differences (SPDs). Analysis was also conducted separately for trans men and trans women, each compared to the age-standardized Ontario population. Results An estimated 33.2% (26.4,40.9) of trans Ontarians reported a past-year unmet health care need in excess of the 10.7% expected based on the age-standardized Ontario population. Inequality was greatest comparing trans with cisgender men (SPD = 34.4% (23.0, 46.1). While trans Ontarians evaluated health care availability in Ontario similarly to the broader population, they were significantly more likely to evaluate availability in their community as fair or poor. Conclusions Trans Ontarians experience inequalities in perception and reported experiences of health care access, with 43.9% reporting a past-year unmet health care need.

Representing approximately 0.5% of the population, transgender (trans) persons in Canada depend on family physicians for both general and transition-related care. However, physicians receive little to no training on this patient population, and trans patients are often profoundly uncomfortable and may avoid health care. This study examined factors associated with patient discomfort discussing trans health issues with a family physician in Ontario, Canada. 433 trans people age 16 and over were surveyed using respondent-driven sampling for the Trans PULSE Project; 356 had a family physician. Weighted logistic regression models were fit to produce prevalence risk ratios (PRRs) via average marginal predictions, for transmasculine (n = 184) and transfeminine (n = 172) trans persons. Among the 83.1% (95% CI = 77.4, 88.9) of trans Ontarians who had a family physician, approximately half reported discomfort discussing trans health issues. 37.2% of transmasculine and 38.1% of transfeminine persons reported at least one trans-specific negative experience. In unadjusted analysis, sociodemographics did not predict discomfort, but those who planned to medically transition sex, but had not begun, were more likely to report discomfort (transmasculine: PRR = 2.62 (95% CI = 1.44, 4.77); transfeminine: PRR = 1.85 (95% CI = 1.08, 3.15)). Adjusted for other factors, greater perceived physician knowledge about trans issues was associated with reduced likelihood of discomfort, and previous trans-specific negative experiences with a family physician with increased discomfort. Transfeminine persons who reported three or more types of negative experiences were 2.26 times as likely, and transmasculine persons 1.61 times as likely, to report discomfort. In adjusted analyses, sociodemographic associations differed by gender, with being previously married or having higher education associated with increased risk of discomfort among transfeminine persons, but decreased risk among transmasculine persons. Within this transgender population, discomfort in discussing trans health issues with a family physician was common, presenting a barrier to accessing primary care despite having a regular family physician and \"universal\" health insurance.

Background Members of the transgender community have identified healthcare access barriers, yet a corresponding inquiry into healthcare provider perspectives has lagged. Our aim was to examine physician perceptions of barriers to healthcare provision for transgender patients. Methods This was a qualitative study with physician participants from Ontario, Canada. Semi-structured interviews were used to capture a progression of ideas related to barriers faced by physicians when caring for trans patients. Qualitative data were then transcribed verbatim and analysed with an emergent grounded theory approach. Results A total of thirteen (13) physician participants were interviewed. Analysis revealed healthcare barriers that grouped into five themes: Accessing resources, medical knowledge deficits, ethics of transition-related medical care, diagnosing vs. pathologising trans patients, and health system determinants. A centralising theme of “not knowing where to go or who to talk to” was also identified. Conclusions The findings of this study show that physicians perceive barriers to the care of trans patients, and that these barriers are multifactorial. Access barriers impede physicians when referring patients to specialists or searching for reliable treatment information. Clinical management of trans patients is complicated by a lack of knowledge, and by ethical considerations regarding treatments—which can be unfamiliar or challenging to physicians. The disciplinary division of responsibilities within medicine further complicates care; few practitioners identify trans healthcare as an interest area, and there is a tendency to overemphasise trans status in mental health evaluations. Failure to recognise and accommodate trans patients within sex-segregated healthcare systems leads to deficient health policy. The findings of this study suggest potential solutions to trans healthcare barriers at the informational level—with increased awareness of clinical guidelines and by including trans health issues in medical education—and at the institutional level, with support for both trans-focused and trans-friendly primary care models.

Background Studies of HIV-related risk in trans (transgender, transsexual, or transitioned) people have most often involved urban convenience samples of those on the male-to-female (MTF) spectrum. Studies have detected high prevalences of HIV-related risk behaviours, self-reported HIV, and HIV seropositivity. Methods The Trans PULSE Project conducted a multi-mode survey using respondent-driven sampling to recruit 433 trans people in Ontario, Canada. Weighted estimates were calculated for HIV-related risk behaviours, HIV testing and self-reported HIV, including subgroup estimates for gender spectrum and ethno-racial groups. Results Trans people in Ontario report a wide range of sexual behaviours with a full range of partner types. High proportions – 25% of female-to-male (FTM) and 51% of MTF individuals – had not had a sex partner within the past year. Of MTFs, 19% had a past-year high-risk sexual experience, versus 7% of FTMs. The largest behavioural contributors to HIV risk were sexual behaviours some may assume trans people do not engage in: unprotected receptive genital sex for FTMs and insertive genital sex for MTFs. Overall, 46% had never been tested for HIV; lifetime testing was highest in Aboriginal trans people and lowest among non-Aboriginal racialized people. Approximately 15% of both FTM and MTF participants had engaged in sex work or exchange sex and about 2% currently work in the sex trade. Self-report of HIV prevalence was 10 times the estimated baseline prevalence for Ontario. However, given wide confidence intervals and the high proportion of trans people who had never been tested for HIV, estimating the actual prevalence was not possible. Conclusions Results suggest potentially higher than baseline levels of HIV; however low testing rates were observed and self-reported prevalences likely underestimate seroprevalence. Explicit inclusion of trans people in epidemiological surveillance statistics would provide much-needed information on incidence and prevalence. Given the wide range of sexual behaviours and partner types reported, HIV prevention programs and materials should not make assumptions regarding types of behaviours trans people do or do not engage in.

Virtual health care use has dramatically increased in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, raising the question of its potential role after the pandemic. For transgender (trans) and nonbinary (TNB) people, virtual care is promising because it may expand access to appropriate health care providers. However, emerging research indicates potential disparities in virtual care access related to sociodemographic, health, and social factors. There is a paucity of research on the factors affecting patient preferences for virtual versus in-person care, particularly in TNB communities. This study aimed to identify the sociodemographic, health, and social factors associated with postpandemic virtual care preferences in TNB communities. The 2020 Trans PULSE Canada COVID survey examined the health, social, and economic impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic among 820 TNB participants who previously completed the prepandemic 2019 Trans PULSE Canada survey (n=2783). Data were weighted to the demographics of the 2019 sample. Chi-square tests were used to compare postpandemic preferences for virtual versus in-person care across sociodemographic, health, and social characteristics. Participants provided open-text responses explaining their preferences, which were used to contextualize quantitative findings. Among 812 participants who indicated whether they would prefer virtual or in-person care after the pandemic, a weighted 32.7% (n=275) would prefer virtual care and 67.3% (n=537) would prefer in-person care. Preference for in-person over virtual care was associated with being in the 14-19 (49/56, weighted 85.0%), 50-64 (51/62, weighted 80.0%), and ≥65 (9/10, weighted 90.7%) age groups (χ =19.0; P=.002). Preference for virtual over in-person care was associated with having a chronic health condition (125/317, weighted 37.7% versus 150/495, weighted 29.9%; χ =4.7; P=.03) and having probable anxiety (229/645, weighted 34.7% versus 46/167, weighted 25.7%; χ =4.3; P=.04). Among participants with romantic partners, preferences varied based on the partner's level of support for gender identity or expression (χ =13.3; P=.004). Participants with moderately supportive partners were more likely than participants with very supportive partners to prefer in-person care (36/43, weighted 85.1% versus 275/445, weighted 62.3%). Care preferences did not vary significantly based on the indicators of socioeconomic status. Open-text responses showed that multiple factors often interacted to influence participant preferences, and that some factors, such as having a chronic condition, simultaneously led some participants to prefer virtual care and others to prefer in-person care. TNB people may have differential interest in virtual care based on factors including age, chronic and mental health conditions, and gender-unsupportive home environments. Future research examining virtual care preferences would benefit from mixed methods intersectional approaches across these factors, to explore complexity in the barriers and facilitators of virtual care access and quality. These observed differences support flexibility with options to choose between in-person and virtual health care to meet TNB patients' specific health needs.

Background Emerging international evidence indicates the COVID-19 pandemic has exacerbated socioeconomic and health challenges faced by transgender (trans) and non-binary populations globally. This qualitative study is among the first to characterize impacts of the pandemic on these groups in Canada. Methods Drawing on data from the Trans PULSE Canada survey ( N  = 820), we used thematic analysis to examine the free-form responses of 697 participants to one open-ended question on impacts of the pandemic. We first organized responses into descriptive themes, and then used this preliminary analytical process to construct more refined, higher order themes that provided a rich account of the pandemic’s impacts. Results Our results are organized into five themes that highlight the pandemic’s impacts on trans and non-binary populations in Canada. These include: (1) reduced access to both gender-affirming and other healthcare, (2) heightened financial, employment, and housing precarity, (3) strained social networks in an era of physical distancing and virtual communication, (4) an intensification of safety concerns, and (5) changes in experiences of gender affirmation. Conclusion Our findings highlight the pandemic’s systemic impacts on the lives of trans and non-binary people in domains such as healthcare, employment, and housing, and on the social networks of these groups, many of which reflect an exacerbation of pre-existing inequities. Based on our analysis, we recommend that public health researchers, policymakers, and practitioners attend to the structural impacts of the pandemic on these groups as primary sites of inquiry and intervention.

Research has shown that bisexuals have poorer health outcomes than heterosexuals, gays, or lesbians, particularly with regard to mental health and substance use. However, research on bisexuals is often hampered by issues in defining bisexuality, small sample sizes, and by the failure to address age differences between bisexuals and other groups or age gradients in mental health. The Risk & Resilience Survey of Bisexual Mental Health collected data on 405 bisexuals from Ontario, Canada, using respondent-driven sampling, a network-based sampling method for hidden populations. The weighted prevalence of severe depression (PHQ-9 ≥ 20) was 4.7%, possible anxiety disorder (OASIS ≥ 8) was 30.9%, possible post-traumatic stress disorder (PCL-C ≥ 50) was 10.8%, and past year suicide attempt was 1.9%. With respect to substance use, the weighted prevalence of problem drinking (AUDIT ≥ 5) was 31.2%, and the weighted prevalence of illicit polydrug use was 30.5%. Daily smoking was low in this sample, with a weighted prevalence of 7.9%. Youth (aged 16-24) reported significantly higher weighted mean scores on depression and post-traumatic stress disorder, and higher rates of past year suicidal ideation (29.7% vs. 15.2%) compared with those aged 25 and older. The burden of mental health and substance use among bisexuals in Ontario is high relative to population-based studies of other sexual orientation groups. Bisexual youth appear to be at risk for poor mental health. Additional research is needed to understand if and how minority stress explains this burden.

Background Across Europe, Canada, and the United States, 22–43 % of transgender (trans) people report a history of suicide attempts. We aimed to identify intervenable factors (related to social inclusion, transphobia, or sex/gender transition) associated with reduced risk of past-year suicide ideation or attempt, and to quantify the potential population health impact. Methods The Trans PULSE respondent-driven sampling (RDS) survey collected data from trans people age 16+ in Ontario, Canada, including 380 who reported on suicide outcomes. Descriptive statistics and multivariable logistic regression models were weighted using RDS II methods. Counterfactual risk ratios and population attributable risks were estimated using model-standardized risks. Results Among trans Ontarians, 35.1 % (95 % CI: 27.6, 42.5) seriously considered, and 11.2 % (95 % CI: 6.0, 16.4) attempted, suicide in the past year. Social support, reduced transphobia, and having any personal identification documents changed to an appropriate sex designation were associated with large relative and absolute reductions in suicide risk, as was completing a medical transition through hormones and/or surgeries (when needed). Parental support for gender identity was associated with reduced ideation. Lower self-reported transphobia (10 th versus 90 th percentile) was associated with a 66 % reduction in ideation (RR = 0.34, 95 % CI: 0.17, 0.67), and an additional 76 % reduction in attempts among those with ideation (RR = 0.24; 95 % CI: 0.07, 0.82). This corresponds to potential prevention of 160 ideations per 1000 trans persons, and 200 attempts per 1,000 with ideation, based on a hypothetical reduction of transphobia from current levels to the 10 th percentile. Conclusions Large effect sizes were observed for this controlled analysis of intervenable factors, suggesting that interventions to increase social inclusion and access to medical transition, and to reduce transphobia, have the potential to contribute to substantial reductions in the extremely high prevalences of suicide ideation and attempts within trans populations. Such interventions at the population level may require policy change.