↓ Skip to main content

Barriers to Gender-Affirming Care for Transgender and Gender Nonconforming Individuals

Overview of attention for article published in Sexuality Research & Social Policy: Journal of NSRC, August 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • One of the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#8 of 264)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (97th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
12 news outlets
twitter
2 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
18 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
90 Mendeley
Title
Barriers to Gender-Affirming Care for Transgender and Gender Nonconforming Individuals
Published in
Sexuality Research & Social Policy: Journal of NSRC, August 2017
DOI 10.1007/s13178-017-0295-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jae A. Puckett, Peter Cleary, Kinton Rossman, Brian Mustanski, Michael E. Newcomb

Abstract

Gender-affirming care, including hormone therapy, "top" (e.g., chest reconstruction surgery) and "bottom" (e.g., vaginoplasty, phalloplasty, metoidioplasty, etc.) surgeries, and puberty blockers, is an efficacious treatment of gender dysphoria for transgender and gender nonconforming (TGNC) individuals. However, many TGNC people encounter significant barriers in accessing gender-affirming care, which we detail via results from on online study. Participants included 256 TGNC individuals (78.9% White, ages 16-73, Mage =28.4). Among participants, 61.3% were receiving hormone therapy, 22.7% had undergone top surgery, and 5.5% had undergone bottom surgery. Open-ended responses (n=201) were thematically analyzed and common barriers included finances and insurance issues, a lack of service availability, and fears or worries. Participants reported various systemic issues and incidents of bias within medical and mental health fields, as well as a lack of medical provider awareness and education. Other themes were interpersonal barriers (e.g., fears of rejection); age and need of parental consent for minors; other medical issues; and a lack of information about how to acquire care. These findings can be utilized to educate professionals in medical and mental health fields about barriers their TGNC patients may encounter in receiving affirming care, and suggest a number of ways to improve access to these services.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 90 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 90 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 18 20%
Student > Master 16 18%
Student > Ph. D. Student 14 16%
Student > Doctoral Student 12 13%
Researcher 8 9%
Other 22 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 31 34%
Medicine and Dentistry 20 22%
Unspecified 14 16%
Nursing and Health Professions 11 12%
Social Sciences 8 9%
Other 6 7%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 99. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 10 April 2018.
All research outputs
#144,944
of 12,788,180 outputs
Outputs from Sexuality Research & Social Policy: Journal of NSRC
#8
of 264 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#7,030
of 264,867 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Sexuality Research & Social Policy: Journal of NSRC
#1
of 4 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,788,180 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 98th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 264 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.5. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 264,867 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 4 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them