0
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Australia's LGBTIQ Research Data Landscape

      Australian Economic Review
      Wiley

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          The past decades have seen rapid changes in societal attitudes and policy surrounding members of the LGBTIQ community, however this community continues to experience adverse social and economic outcomes relative to their cisgendered heterosexual counterparts. Understanding the LGBTIQ data landscape is essential to promote scholarship in this space and highlight avenues for future data collection. Here I provide an overview of the 17 national data surveys in Australia that capture information on either sexual or gender diversity and are either repeated or longitudinal samples. For each dataset, I provide details on questions pertaining to sexual and gender diversity, indicative sample sizes and age ranges, scope of survey, and data custodians. Altogether, I find thatcollection of information on sexual and gender diverse (SGD) populations in Australia is poor and terminology varies widely. Only seven datasets capture information on both sexual and gender diversity and, of these, none are nationally representative, and only one is a longitudinal sample. Altogether, this review highlights the need for large‐scale, representative and longitudinal data capture of SGD populations in Australia .

          Related collections

          Most cited references64

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: found
          Is Open Access

          Transgender-inclusive measures of sex/gender for population surveys: Mixed-methods evaluation and recommendations

          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.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            2007 National Survey of Mental Health and Wellbeing: methods and key findings.

            To provide a description of the methods and key findings of the 2007 Australian National Survey of Mental Health and Wellbeing. A national face-to-face household survey of 8841 (60% response rate) community residents aged between 16 and 85 years was carried out using the World Mental Health Survey Initiative version of the Composite International Diagnostic Interview. Diagnoses were made according to ICD-10. Key findings include the prevalence of mental disorder, sex and age distributions of mental disorders, severity of mental disorders, comorbidity among mental disorders, and the extent of disability and health service use associated with mental disorders. The prevalence of any lifetime mental disorder was 45.5%. The prevalence of any 12 month mental disorder was 20.0%, with anxiety disorders (14.4%) the most common class of mental disorder followed by affective disorders (6.2%) and substance use disorders (5.1%). Mental disorders, particularly affective disorders, were disabling. One in four people (25.4%) with 12 month mental disorders had more than one class of mental disorder. One-third (34.9%) of people with a mental disorder used health services for mental health problems in the 12 months prior to the interview. Mental disorders are common in Australia. Many people have more than one class of mental disorder. Mental disorders are associated with substantial disability, yet many people with mental disorders do not seek help for their mental health problems.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Sexual and gender minority health: what we know and what needs to be done.

              We describe the emergence of lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) health as a key area of study and practice for clinicians and public health professionals. We discuss the specific needs of LGBT populations on the basis of the most recent epidemiological and clinical investigations, methods for defining and measuring LGBT populations, and the barriers they face in obtaining appropriate care and services. We then discuss how clinicians and public health professionals can improve research methods, clinical outcomes, and service delivery for lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender people.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Australian Economic Review
                Australian Economic Review
                Wiley
                0004-9018
                1467-8462
                June 2022
                March 28 2022
                June 2022
                : 55
                : 2
                : 290-308
                Article
                10.1111/1467-8462.12462
                7270e9c1-5e15-4b1f-a451-7ff44cbc1478
                © 2022

                http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

                History

                Comments

                Comment on this article