Wesley M King1, Jaclyn M W Hughto2, Don Operario3. 1. University of Michigan School of Public Health, 1415 Washington Heights, Ann Arbor, MI 48109, USA. Electronic address: wesking@umich.edu. 2. Brown University School of Public Health, 121 South Main Street, Providence, RI 02903, USA. Electronic address: jaclyn_hughto@brown.edu. 3. Brown University School of Public Health, 121 South Main Street, Providence, RI 02903, USA. Electronic address: don_operario@brown.edu.
Abstract
RATIONALE: A growing body of transgender (trans) health research has explored the relationship between stigma and health; yet, studies have conceptualized and operationalized anti-trans stigma in multiple ways. OBJECTIVE: This scoping review aims to critically analyze quantitative measures of anti-trans stigma in the U.S. using a socioecological framework. METHOD: We organized and appraised measures from 126 included articles according to socioecological level: structural, interpersonal, or individual. RESULTS: Of the identified articles, 36 measured anti-trans stigma at the structural level (i.e., institutional structures and policies), 102 measured anti-trans at the interpersonal level (i.e., community interactions), and 44 measured anti-trans stigma at the individual level (i.e., internalized or anticipated stigma). Definitions of anti-trans stigma varied substantially across articles. Most measures were adapted from measures developed for other populations (i.e., sexual minorities) and were not previously validated for trans samples. CONCLUSIONS: Studies analyzing anti-trans stigma should concretely define anti-trans stigma. There is a need to develop measures of anti-trans stigma at all socioecological levels informed by the lived experiences of trans people.
RATIONALE: A growing body of transgender (trans) health research has explored the relationship between stigma and health; yet, studies have conceptualized and operationalized anti-trans stigma in multiple ways. OBJECTIVE: This scoping review aims to critically analyze quantitative measures of anti-trans stigma in the U.S. using a socioecological framework. METHOD: We organized and appraised measures from 126 included articles according to socioecological level: structural, interpersonal, or individual. RESULTS: Of the identified articles, 36 measured anti-trans stigma at the structural level (i.e., institutional structures and policies), 102 measured anti-trans at the interpersonal level (i.e., community interactions), and 44 measured anti-trans stigma at the individual level (i.e., internalized or anticipated stigma). Definitions of anti-trans stigma varied substantially across articles. Most measures were adapted from measures developed for other populations (i.e., sexual minorities) and were not previously validated for trans samples. CONCLUSIONS: Studies analyzing anti-trans stigma should concretely define anti-trans stigma. There is a need to develop measures of anti-trans stigma at all socioecological levels informed by the lived experiences of trans people.
Authors: Jialiang Cui; Sujith Kumar Prankumar; Horas Th Wong; Isaac Yeboah Addo; Christopher Tumwine; Muhammad Naveed Noor Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2022-06-01 Impact factor: 3.006
Authors: Jae M Sevelius; Deepalika Chakravarty; Samantha E Dilworth; Greg Rebchook; Torsten B Neilands Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2021-03-23 Impact factor: 3.390
Authors: Joy Van de Cauter; Hanna Van Schoorisse; Dominique Van de Velde; Joz Motmans; Lutgart Braeckman Journal: PLoS One Date: 2021-11-01 Impact factor: 3.240