Caring for Sexual and Gender Minority Patients: What Factors Explain Self-Reported Competence among Health Care Professional Students?
Background: Lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer and intersex people comprise approximately 5% of the U.S. population, yet health care professional student education on sexual and gender minority (SGM) health is sparse. This study explored the degree to which sociodemographic factors and student affiliation with SGM people explained self-reported competence in caring for SGM patients.
Methods: This study sought to define Reduced Models from an eight-variable Full Model that explained a meaningful amount (≥ 0.15) of total variance across a sample of health care professional students in terms of six criterion variables: Basic Knowledge, Attitudinal Awareness and Clinical Preparedness (subscales of the Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender Development of Clinical Skills Scale); Attitudes Toward LGBT People Scale (ATLPS); and Beliefs and Behaviors (subscales of the Gay Affirming Practice Scale).
Results: Political affiliation, religiosity, and SGM affiliation were predictor variables in half of the Reduced Models. SGM-specific health training hours were included in Reduced Models for Clinical Preparedness and affirming Behaviors.
Conclusion: Sociodemographic factors, lived experiences, and amount of training in SGM-specific health matter when it comes to health care professional students’ sense of preparedness in caring for SGM patients.
This is a list of supplementary files associated with this preprint. Click to download.
Posted 16 Apr, 2020
Caring for Sexual and Gender Minority Patients: What Factors Explain Self-Reported Competence among Health Care Professional Students?
Posted 16 Apr, 2020
Background: Lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer and intersex people comprise approximately 5% of the U.S. population, yet health care professional student education on sexual and gender minority (SGM) health is sparse. This study explored the degree to which sociodemographic factors and student affiliation with SGM people explained self-reported competence in caring for SGM patients.
Methods: This study sought to define Reduced Models from an eight-variable Full Model that explained a meaningful amount (≥ 0.15) of total variance across a sample of health care professional students in terms of six criterion variables: Basic Knowledge, Attitudinal Awareness and Clinical Preparedness (subscales of the Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender Development of Clinical Skills Scale); Attitudes Toward LGBT People Scale (ATLPS); and Beliefs and Behaviors (subscales of the Gay Affirming Practice Scale).
Results: Political affiliation, religiosity, and SGM affiliation were predictor variables in half of the Reduced Models. SGM-specific health training hours were included in Reduced Models for Clinical Preparedness and affirming Behaviors.
Conclusion: Sociodemographic factors, lived experiences, and amount of training in SGM-specific health matter when it comes to health care professional students’ sense of preparedness in caring for SGM patients.