Losing a Close Friend or Family Member Due to COVID-19 and Mental Health among LGBTQ Youth.

This study examines the association between having lost a close friend or family member to COVID-19 and mental health outcomes among lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, or queer (LGBTQ) youth. Data come from 33,993 respondents in the United States, ages 13 to 24, who completed an online survey of LGBTQ youth mental health. Multivariate logistic regression was used to determine the adjusted odds of recent anxiety, depression, considering, or attempting suicide in the past year based on whether or not the youth reported having lost a close friend or family member to COVID-19. Among the full sample, experiences of COVID-19 loss were associated with recent anxiety (adjusted odds ratio (aOR) = 1.29, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.20-1.40), recent depression (aOR = 1.23, 95% CI [1.15, 1.32]), seriously considering suicide in the past year (aOR = 1.22, 95% CI (1.14, 1.30)), and attempting suicide in the past year (aOR = 1.55, 95% CI (1.41, 1.69)). These findings highlight the urgent need for investment in low-barrier, affirming mental health services for LGBTQ youth who have experienced COVID-19 loss to support their grief, overall mental health, and healthy development.

Transgender Youth's Perspectives on Factors Influencing Intended and Unintended Pregnancies.

Drawing on data from focus groups with 152 trans youth aged 14-18 years in the United States, this article explores the factors that the participants understood as contributing to adolescent pregnancy among trans youth. Youth posited that unintended pregnancies occur due to barriers to contraceptives; a lack of gender-affirming sexual health education; sexual assault and dating violence; and mental health-influenced sexual risk-taking. Participants suggested that intended pregnancies may be a self-development strategy; a self-directed effort to repress/change gender modality or identity; and due to the perceived incompatibility between pregnancy and transition, where pregnancy must occur prior to transitioning.

Comparing Factors Shaping Sexual Violence Perpetration for Sexual and Gender Minority Youth and Cisgender Heterosexual Youth.

Sexual and gender minority (SGM) youth experience higher rates of sexual violence victimization than their cisgender heterosexual counterparts. Very little is known about how the minority status of SGM youth contextualizes their victimization and perpetration experiences. In one-on-one interviews with 39 SGM youth and 11 cisgender heterosexuals (non-SGM) youth, we compared the contextual factors shaping sexual violence victimization and perpetration between the two groups using a qualitative descriptive approach. Interviews highlighted how SGM youth continue to experience extensive discrimination that negatively impacts all aspects of their lives, while non-SGM youth do not discuss having to navigate stigma and discrimination in their lives. SGM youth pointed to a lack of understanding of sexual violence within the SGM community. Both groups believed that SGM perpetration was unlikely: while most SGM and non-SGM youth agreed that sexual violence between youth was a problem, same-gender perpetration was seldom discussed. Unlike their non-SGM counterparts, SGM youth felt that they were targeted because of their sexual and gender identity. SGM youth also felt that they were more vulnerable to sexual violence because of how they physically looked, particularly if their gender expression did not match cis-normative expectations. SGM youth reported facing unique pressures when seeking support as a victim, particularly a fear of being outed or stigmatized as part of the process. They also conveyed that SGM people worried about being treated unfairly if they reported sexual violence to authorities. Findings suggest that stigma and concerns of discrimination are unique aspects of sexual violence for SGM compared to non-SGM youth. All youth need to have access to sexual violence prevention education that includes SGM and non-SGM youth as both victims and perpetrators to begin addressing these noted disparities in experiences.

' if U equals U what does the second U mean?': sexual minority men's accounts of HIV undetectability and untransmittable scepticism.

The everyday meaning and use of HIV 'undetectability' raises significant questions about the social and sexual significance of this state of viral suppression. We conducted in-depth, semi-structured interviews with 25 sexual minority men living in Vancouver, Canada, including men living with HIV. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim and analysed using grounded theory. Most participants understood being undetectable to signify that someone living with HIV is at a 'low,' 'lower,' or 'slim to no' risk of sexually transmitting HIV, as opposed to meaning 'uninfectious' or 'untransmittable'. Men discussed how undetectability was communicated in-person and online, including via sexual networking apps, and revealed how it is sometimes confused or conflated with another biomedical advance in HIV-prevention, namely pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP). HIV-negative men expressed significant scientific scepticism, a reluctance to incorporate a partner's low viral load or undetectable HIV status into their sexual decision-making, and an enduring fear associated with knowingly having sex with someone who is HIV-positive. We describe this as a form of untransmittable scepticism. While international campaigns have worked to communicate the scientific message that 'undetectable equals untransmittable' (U = U), the sexual stigma attached to HIV remains durable among some gay, bisexual, queer and other men who have sex with men.

Knowledge and attitudes of syphilis and syphilis pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) among men who have sex with men in Vancouver, Canada: a qualitative study.

OBJECTIVES: In British Columbia, Canada, syphilis is at record-high rates, with over 80% of cases in 2017 seen in gay, bisexual and other men who have sex with men (GBM). The syphilis epidemic is of particular concern for those living with HIV, since syphilis may lead to more serious complications in this population. We sought to explore syphilis-related knowledge and attitudes around biomedical prevention options for syphilis, with the goal of informing effective strategies to prevent syphilis. DESIGN: We conducted a qualitative study consisting of in-depth, individual interviews from December 2016 to June 2017. Our interviews focused on participants' knowledge about syphilis and perceptions regarding syphilis pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP). Interviews were analysed using Grounded Theory. PARTICIPANTS: Twenty-five GBM were interviewed (64% white; median age: 43 years), including men living with HIV and/or with a history of syphilis. SETTING: Vancouver, British Columbia. RESULTS: Five interrelated themes emerged. First, GBM were aware of the local syphilis epidemic. Second, syphilis-related knowledge differed according to syphilis and HIV serostatus. Third, competing ideas emerged regarding men's concerns about syphilis. While our participants expressed concern about getting syphilis, they also described the importance of sexual pleasure. Fourth, many participants said that syphilis was not perceived to be alarming; preventing HIV infection remained a primary concern for many. Finally, while syphilis PrEP was appealing to those living with HIV or a prior syphilis diagnosis, others were concerned about antibiotic resistance, cost and side effects. CONCLUSIONS: Our participants organised their safer sex strategies around HIV, not syphilis. Although syphilis-related knowledge was relatively high among GBM living with HIV and those with a prior syphilis diagnosis, this knowledge did not appear to be related with safer sexual practices, such as increased condom use. This work highlights the importance of examining other potential prevention solutions, such as syphilis PrEP.

Investigating the key indicators for evaluating post-disaster shelter.

This study sought to identify the primary indicators for evaluating shelter assistance following natural disasters and then to develop a shelter evaluation instrument based on these indicators. Electronic databases and the 'grey' literature were scoured for publications with a relation to post-disaster shelter assistance. Indicators for evaluating such assistance were extracted from these publications. In total, 1,525 indicators were extracted from 181 publications. A preliminary evaluation instrument was designed from these 1,525 indicators. Shelter experts checked the instrument for face and content validity, and it was revised subsequently based on their input. The revised instrument comprises a version for use by shelter agencies (48 questions that assess 23 indicators) and a version for use by beneficiaries (52 questions that assess 22 indicators). The instrument can serve as a standardised tool to enable groups to gauge whether or not the shelter assistance that they supply meets the needs of disaster-affected populations.

The impact of drop-in centers on the health of street children in New Delhi, India: A cross-sectional study.

OBJECTIVES: (1) To determine whether street children who visit drop-in centers experience better physical and mental health, and engage in less substance use than street children who do not visit centers. (2) To determine whether the duration of attendance at a center has an impact on the above outcomes. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional study with 69 street children from two drop-in centers in New Delhi, India (attenders) and a comparison group of 65 street children who did not visit drop-in centers (non-attenders). We used pretested questionnaires to assess their physical health, substance use status and mental health. RESULTS: Attenders experienced fewer ill health outcomes, engaged in less substance use, and had better mental health outcomes than non-attenders (p<0.01). For every month of attendance at a drop-in center, street children experienced 2.1% (95% CI 0% to 4.1%, p=0.05) fewer ill health outcomes per month and used 4.6% (95% CI 1.3% to 8%, p=0.01) fewer substances. Street children were also less likely to have been a current substance user than a never substance user for every additional month of attendance at a center (OR: 0.79, 95% CI: 0.66-0.96, p=0.02). Duration of drop-in center attendance was not a significant factor in predicting mental health problems. CONCLUSION: Drop-in centers may improve the physical health of street children and reduce their substance abuse. Rigorous longitudinal studies are needed to better determine if drop-in centers impact the health and substance use status of street children in LMICs.