Mapping the scientific literature on obstetrical and perinatal health among sexual and gender minoritised (SGM) childbearing people and their infants: a scoping review protocol.

INTRODUCTION: Sexual and gender minoritised (SGM) populations are disproportionately impacted by multilevel risk factors for obstetrical and perinatal outcomes, including structural (eg, stigma, discrimination, access to care) and individual risk factors (eg, partner violence, poor mental health, substance use). Emerging evidence shows SGM childbearing people have worse obstetrical outcomes and their infants have worse perinatal outcomes, when compared with their cisgender and heterosexual counterparts; this emerging evidence necessitates a comprehensive examination of existing literature on obstetrical and perinatal health among SGM people. The goal of this scoping review is to comprehensively map the extent, range and nature of scientific literature on obstetrical and perinatal physical health outcomes among SGM populations and their infants. We aim to summarise findings from existing literature, potentially informing clinical guidelines on perinatal care, as well as highlighting knowledge gaps and providing directions for future research. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We will follow the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) scoping review framework and report findings according to the PRISMA Extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR) guidelines. We will conduct a broad systematic search in Medline/PubMed, Embase, CINAHL and Web of Science Core Collection. Eligible studies will include peer-reviewed, empirical, English-language publications pertaining to obstetrical and perinatal physical health outcomes of SGM people or their infants. No temporal or geographical limitations will be applied to the search. Studies conducted in all settings will be considered. Records will be managed, screened and extracted by two independent reviewers. Study characteristics, key findings and research gaps will be presented in tables and summarised narratively. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval is not required as primary data will not be collected. The findings of this scoping review will be disseminated through a peer-reviewed journal and conference presentations. PROTOCOL REGISTRATION: Open Science Framework https://osf.io/6fg4a/.

Childbearing at the margins: A systematic metasynthesis of sexual and gender diverse childbearing experiences.

BACKGROUND: The reproductive and perinatal health of sexual and gender-diverse (SGD) individuals is a research priority area for the National Institutes of Health. Over the past decade, this childbearing population has been the focus of several qualitative studies providing the opportunity to evaluate and synthesize the qualitative literature on SGD childbearing experiences in a metasynthesis. METHODS: We conducted a literature search of four databases to identify original research published from January 2011 through June 2021. These results were augmented by forward and backward searching strategies. Two authors independently screened studies. All qualitative studies of the childbearing experience were eligible. Data were extracted and inductively coded using conventional content analysis, and studies underwent a quality appraisal by two authors. RESULTS: From 2396 articles, 127 full-text articles were screened, and 25 were included in this synthesis. Three overarching themes were identified: (a) Systematic Invisibility; (b) Creating Personhood Through Parenthood; and (c) Resilient Narratives of Childbearing. CONCLUSIONS: Relative to heterosexual and cisgender parents, SGD childbearing parents experience unique structural and interpersonal challenges and employ critically important resilience strategies and coping techniques to manage an overwhelming heterocisnormative experience. These findings provide an important target for health care organizations and professionals to improve SGD perinatal health. In addition, this metasynthesis identified persistent gaps in our understanding of this marginalized childbearing population, which have important implications for reducing health disparities that SGD parents experience.

Interdisciplinary clinicians' attitudes, challenges, and success strategies in providing care to transgender people: a qualitative descriptive study.

BACKGROUND: Access to clinicians competent in transgender health remains a significant barrier and contributor toward health inequity for transgender people. Studies on access and barriers to care have predominantly evaluated transgender patients' perceptions, but scant research has included the perspectives of clinicians. AIMS: We conducted a qualitative study to explore how clinicians (meaning physicians and advanced practice providers, in this paper) in the United States: (1) attain and utilize information, (2) perceive barriers and facilitators, and (3) understood gaps in their professional training, in regard to practicing transgender health care. METHODS: A Qualitative Descriptive approach guided our conventional content analysis of field notes and interviews with clinicians within a parent study that explored health care access among transgender adults. Transcripts were coded into meaning units that were iteratively abstracted into themes. Standard measures were performed to promote the trustworthiness of the analysis and reduce bias. RESULTS: Participants (n = 13) consisted of physicians (n = 8), physician assistants (n = 3), and nurse practitioners (n = 2). The majority were women (n = 11), identified as White (n = 9), cisgender (n = 13), and ages ranged from 31 - 58 years. Five main themes were identified: (1) Knowledge Acquisition: Formal and Informal Pathways to Competency; (2) Perceived Challenges and Barriers: I didn't know what I was doing; (3) Power to Deny: Prescriptive Authority and Gatekeeping; (4) Stigma: This is really strange, and I can't really understand it; (5) Reflections: Strategies for Success, Rewards, and Personal Motivations. DISCUSSION: Clinicians gained a sense of comfort and competence with mentorship, self-directed learning, clinical experience, and person-centered, harm-reduction approaches. Stigma, bias, and structural-level factors were barriers to providing care. This study offers a unique perspective of clinicians' motivations and strategies for providing gender-affirming care and elucidates how stigma impacts the delivery of gender-affirming care.