B R Simon Rosser1, Elizabeth J Polter1, Neelam Chandiramani1, Sean Cahill2, Christopher W Wheldon3, Badrinath R Konety4, Charles J Ryan5, Ryan Haggart6, Aditya Kapoor1. 1. Division of Epidemiology and Community Health, School of Public Health, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA. 2. Fenway Institute, Fenway Health, Boston, Massachusetts, USA. 3. Department of Social and Behavioral Sciences, College of Public Health, Temple University, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA. 4. Department of Urology, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA. 5. Department of Medicine, University of Minnesota Medical School, Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA. 6. School of Medicine and Public Health, University of Wisconsin, Madison, Wisconsin, USA.
Abstract
Purpose: We evaluated the acceptability and feasibility of collecting sexual orientation and gender identity (SOGI) data in oncology and urology clinical settings. Methods: We surveyed 101 urology and 104 oncology clinic patients with a standardized sexual orientation question with six response options, "lesbian, gay, or homosexual;" "straight or heterosexual;" "bisexual;" "something else;" "do not know;" and "choose not to disclose." Next, we added the sexual orientation question and an expanded gender identity question to the electronic medical record (EMR) and analyzed data on the first 450 urology and 103 oncology patients. Acceptability and feasibility were assessed based on responses to the survey and patient intake forms. Results: In the acceptability survey, only 3% of urology and 4% of oncology patients selected "choose not to disclose." Over 90% of patients in both clinics assessed the sexual orientation question as understandable and easy to answer. In all, 79% of urology and 73% of oncology patients stated they would answer it in their EMR, but only 56% of urology and 54% of oncology patients described the information as important. Sexual minority patients were as likely as heterosexual patients to state they would answer the question. Only 5% of patients selected "choose not to disclose" for sexual orientation, and <1% for the expanded gender identity question. Conclusion: Adding SOGI questions to the EMR appears to be acceptable and feasible and the sexual orientation question was understandable to a large majority of urology and oncology patients. Clinical Trials.gov ID: #NCT03343093.
Purpose: We evaluated the acceptability and feasibility of collecting sexual orientation and gender identity (SOGI) data in oncology and urology clinical settings. Methods: We surveyed 101 urology and 104 oncology clinic patients with a standardized sexual orientation question with six response options, "lesbian, gay, or homosexual;" "straight or heterosexual;" "bisexual;" "something else;" "do not know;" and "choose not to disclose." Next, we added the sexual orientation question and an expanded gender identity question to the electronic medical record (EMR) and analyzed data on the first 450 urology and 103 oncology patients. Acceptability and feasibility were assessed based on responses to the survey and patient intake forms. Results: In the acceptability survey, only 3% of urology and 4% of oncology patients selected "choose not to disclose." Over 90% of patients in both clinics assessed the sexual orientation question as understandable and easy to answer. In all, 79% of urology and 73% of oncology patients stated they would answer it in their EMR, but only 56% of urology and 54% of oncology patients described the information as important. Sexual minority patients were as likely as heterosexual patients to state they would answer the question. Only 5% of patients selected "choose not to disclose" for sexual orientation, and <1% for the expanded gender identity question. Conclusion: Adding SOGI questions to the EMR appears to be acceptable and feasible and the sexual orientation question was understandable to a large majority of urology and oncology patients. Clinical Trials.gov ID: #NCT03343093.
Entities:
Keywords:
data collection; gender; oncology; sexual orientation; urology
Authors: B R Simon Rosser; G Nic Rider; Aditya Kapoor; Kristine M C Talley; Ryan Haggart; Nidhi Kohli; Badrinath R Konety; Darryl Mitteldorf; Elizabeth J Polter; Michael W Ross; William West; Christopher Wheldon; Morgan Wright Journal: Transl Androl Urol Date: 2021-07
Authors: Charles S Kamen; Mandi L Pratt-Chapman; Stephen C Meersman; Gwendolyn P Quinn; Matthew B Schabath; Shail Maingi; Janette K Merrill; Elizabeth Garrett-Mayer; Melinda Kaltenbaugh; Caroline Schenkel; Shine Chang Journal: JCO Oncol Pract Date: 2022-05-23