An assessment of the attitudes, knowledge, and education regarding the health care needs of LGBTQ patients with cancer: results of an ESMO/SIOPE global survey
Bibliographic record
Abstract
•We report data from a global survey of oncology care providers’ attitudes when treating LGBTQ patients with cancer.•Most providers feel comfortable treating LGBTQ patients.•Respondents do not feel well-prepared by pre/postgraduate training programmes about the health care needs of LGBTQ patients.•The need for improved information gathering of gender identification and sexual orientation status was raised.•Strong interest for additional education on these issues was expressed. BackgroundLesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer (LGBTQ) individuals with cancer have specific and unique health issues and needs. Reports persist of inequalities in the care provided for these patients, making it important to assess the attitudes and knowledge of LGBTQ needs among those who provide care.Materials and methodsThe European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) and the European Society for Paediatric Oncology (SIOP Europe) Adolescents and Young Adults Working Group designed this survey comprising 67 questions covering demographics, knowledge, and education of LGBTQ health needs, and attitudes regarding LGBTQ patients with cancer.ResultsAmong the 672 respondents, a majority do not ask about sexual orientation and gender identity during first visit (64% and 58%, respectively). Only a minority of the respondents considered themselves well informed regarding gay/lesbian and transgender patients’ health (44% and 25%, respectively) and psychosocial needs (34%). There was high interest in receiving education regarding the unique health needs of LGBTQ patients (73%).ConclusionsSurvey respondents indicated a willingness to provide care to LGBTQ patients, but a lack of confidence in the knowledge of the health issues and needs of LGBTQ individuals. Lack of training provided in medical schools and postgraduate training programmes and strong interest for additional education on these issues were reported. Lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer (LGBTQ) individuals with cancer have specific and unique health issues and needs. Reports persist of inequalities in the care provided for these patients, making it important to assess the attitudes and knowledge of LGBTQ needs among those who provide care. The European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) and the European Society for Paediatric Oncology (SIOP Europe) Adolescents and Young Adults Working Group designed this survey comprising 67 questions covering demographics, knowledge, and education of LGBTQ health needs, and attitudes regarding LGBTQ patients with cancer. Among the 672 respondents, a majority do not ask about sexual orientation and gender identity during first visit (64% and 58%, respectively). Only a minority of the respondents considered themselves well informed regarding gay/lesbian and transgender patients’ health (44% and 25%, respectively) and psychosocial needs (34%). There was high interest in receiving education regarding the unique health needs of LGBTQ patients (73%). Survey respondents indicated a willingness to provide care to LGBTQ patients, but a lack of confidence in the knowledge of the health issues and needs of LGBTQ individuals. Lack of training provided in medical schools and postgraduate training programmes and strong interest for additional education on these issues were reported.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".