Rich Ashleigh J, McGorray Emma L, Felt Dylan, Kerr Maddie, Baldwin-SoRelle Carrie, Beach Lauren B, Phillips Gregory, Poteat Tonia
Division of Healthcare in Adult Populations, Duke University School of Nursing, Durham, North Carolina, USA.
Department of Psychology, Northwestern University, Chicago, Illinois, USA.
LGBT Health. 2025 Aug-Sep;12(6):395-406. doi: 10.1089/lgbt.2024.0105. Epub 2025 Mar 7.
Toward the goal of developing standardized sex, sexual orientation, and gender identity (SSOGI) measures that can be used across demographics and regions, this review aimed to synthesize and summarize how SSOGI have been assessed within health research, including the quality and validity of these measures. We conducted a systematic review of peer-reviewed research developing or evaluating SSOGI measures in PubMed, PsycInfo, CINAHL, and Health and Psychosocial Instruments bibliographic databases. Eligible studies reported original peer-reviewed research focused on SSOGI measurement in adult populations in the United States from 2012 through June 7, 2022. In consultation with librarians, search results were screened for inclusion using an innovative multiple-phase method of stratification, supervised clustering, and supervised machine learning. We conducted manual screening and data extraction in Covidence. In total, 17,814 citations were returned from all databases, with 30 studies eligible for final inclusion in the review. Gender identity measurement was the focus of half of the included studies (51%), followed by sexual orientation (40%), with little asexuality-specific measurement research ( = 1 study), and beyond sexual orientation, research on sex or variations in sexual characteristics ( = 1 study, each). Although the field of sexual and gender minority health research has grown exponentially over the past decade, there remains a dearth of literature focused on the development and evaluation of SSOGI measures. We found heterogeneity across the SSOGI measurement literature including by study design, sampling strategy, and study population. Important identified gaps include the need for attention to the measurement of sex, variations in sex characteristics, and asexuality-inclusive sexual orientation measures.
为了实现开发可在不同人口统计数据和地区使用的标准化性、性取向和性别认同(SSOGI)测量方法的目标,本综述旨在综合和总结在健康研究中如何评估SSOGI,包括这些测量方法的质量和有效性。我们在PubMed、PsycInfo、CINAHL以及健康与心理社会工具书目数据库中对开发或评估SSOGI测量方法的同行评审研究进行了系统综述。符合条件的研究报告了2012年至2022年6月7日期间在美国成年人群中进行的、聚焦于SSOGI测量的原创同行评审研究。在与图书馆员协商后,使用分层、监督聚类和监督机器学习的创新多阶段方法筛选搜索结果以确定是否纳入。我们在Covidence中进行了人工筛选和数据提取。所有数据库共返回17,814条引文,其中30项研究符合最终纳入综述的条件。性别认同测量是纳入研究的一半(51%)的重点,其次是性取向(40%),针对无性恋的测量研究很少(=1项研究),除性取向外,关于性别或性特征变异的研究(每项=1项研究)也很少。尽管性少数群体和性别少数群体健康研究领域在过去十年中呈指数级增长,但仍缺乏专注于SSOGI测量方法开发和评估的文献。我们发现SSOGI测量文献存在异质性,包括研究设计、抽样策略和研究人群方面。确定的重要差距包括需要关注性别的测量、性特征的变异以及包含无性恋的性取向测量方法。