Scoping Review of Sexual and Gender Minority Health Research in Ireland.
John P Gilmore, Tonda L Hughes, Sean Kearns and 5 others
PMID 40955727WHAT IT FOUND
Irish sexual and gender minority health research is narrow: most studies cover gay and bisexual men, adults, mental health and HIV.
Nurses may see patients report stigma, hidden identities, misgendering and barriers to care.
Key findings
01Most included studies focused on gay, bisexual and men who have sex with men; only one study each focused on bisexual people or lesbian women.
02Across included studies, SGM people in Ireland were reported to have higher rates of depression, anxiety, suicidal thoughts and self-harm than cisgender heterosexual peers.
03Qualitative studies in the review describe SGM participants being dismissed, misgendered or made invisible, with delays, mistrust and heightened distress reported.
STILL TO COME
How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for RNs
Read the rest of this summary
You get three full summaries a month, free, and we do not ask for a card. Search, the TL;DRs and your library stay unlimited either way.
What it does not show
This is a scoping review, not a trial, so it maps what has been studied rather than showing whether any care works. The authors did not assess the quality or risk of bias of the included studies. Only peer-reviewed English articles from 2014 to 2024 were included, so community reports and older research were left out. Many included studies used convenience samples and online surveys, often centred on Dublin, so rural, older, disabled, ethnic minority and multiply marginalised SGM people may be underrepresented. Most studies focused on gay, bisexual and men who have sex with men and on adults; sexual minority women, intersex people and adolescents were rarely studied. Detailed ethnicity, disability and socioeconomic data were limited or inconsistently reported, so intersectional effects could not be assessed. The review did not examine the health impacts of COVID-19.
Declared interests
The authors declared no conflicts of interest.
The easy way to misread this
Do not read this review as proof that any clinical intervention improves SGM health or that affirming care has measured outcomes. It maps published studies, did not assess their quality, and the included studies mostly describe patient experiences and gaps in research.