Lack of health data on LGBTQ+ people has real-world consequences. A participant in a 2020 report from the National LGBT Cancer Network said: “There are no guidelines for cancers that are more prevalent among Trans women. I had to fight like hell to have an anoscopy, and sure enough we found [precancerous lesions]!”
That same year, the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine issued a hallmark report on the health and well-being of LGBTQ+ people. It found that social and structural stigma has contributed to lower rates of engagement with the health care system (such as preventative screenings), higher rates of uninsurance and under-insurance, higher rates of many risk factors including smoking and obesity, higher rates of some cancers and cardiovascular disease, and higher rates of mental health challenges including depression, anxiety, addiction and suicidality.
As a result, it encouraged public and private entities, including the pharmaceutical industry, to include LGBTQ+ data in “all data collection efforts and instruments.” Since then, the White House, a perspective piece in the New England Journal of Medicine, and others have called for broader collection of LGBTQ+ health data.
This article is exclusive to STAT+ subscribers
Unlock this article — plus in-depth analysis, newsletters, premium events, and networking platform access.
Already have an account? Log in
Already have an account? Log in
To submit a correction request, please visit our Contact Us page.
STAT encourages you to share your voice. We welcome your commentary, criticism, and expertise on our subscriber-only platform, STAT+ Connect