REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH IN TRANS AND GENDER DIVERSE PATIENTS: Mind the gap: a nationwide audit of LGBTQ+ inclusion in fertility care providers in the United Kingdom
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In brief: We describe a first-of-its-kind audit of LGBTQ+ inclusivity in fertility care providers across the United Kingdom. Despite efforts being made to improve LGBTQ+ inclusion in fertility care, our results paint a picture of widespread gaps in clinical and cultural expertise alongside significant barriers to LGBTQ+ inclusion. Abstract: LGBTQ+ patients comprise one of the fastest-growing user demographics in fertility care, yet they remain under-represented in fertility research, practice, and discourse. Existing studies have revealed significant systemic barriers, including cisheteronormativity, discrimination, and gaps in clinical expertise. In this article, we present a checklist of measures that clinics can take to improve LGBTQ+ inclusion in fertility care, co-created with members of the LGBTQ+ community. This checklist focuses on three key areas: cultural competence, clinical considerations, and online presence. The cultural competence criteria encompass inclusive communication practices, a broad understanding of LGBTQ+ healthcare needs, and knowledge of treatment options suitable for LGBTQ+ individuals. Clinical considerations include awareness of alternative examination and gamete collection techniques for transgender and gender diverse patients, the existence of specific clinical pathways for LGBTQ+ patients, and sensitivity to the psychological aspects of fertility care unique to this demographic. The online presence criteria evaluate provider websites for the use of inclusive language and the availability of LGBTQ+-relevant information. The checklist was used as the foundation for an audit of fertility care providers across the UK in early 2024. Our audit identified a widespread lack of LGBTQ+ inclusion, particularly for transgender and gender diverse patients, highlighting deficiencies in clinical knowledge and cultural competence. Our work calls attention to the need for further efforts to understand the barriers to inclusive and competent LGBTQ+ fertility care from both healthcare provider and patient perspectives.
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 | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".