There is mounting evidence that lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer or questioning (LGBTQ) adults experience disparities across several cardiovascular risk factors compared with their cisgender heterosexual peers. These disparities are posited to be driven primarily by exposure to psychosocial stressors across the life span. This American Heart Association scientific statement reviews the extant literature on the cardiovascular health of LGBTQ adults. Informed by the minority stress and social ecological models, the objectives of this statement were (1) to present a conceptual model to elucidate potential mechanisms underlying cardiovascular health disparities in LGBTQ adults, (2) to identify research gaps, and (3) to provide suggestions for improving cardiovascular research and care of LGBTQ people. Despite the identified methodological limitations, there is evidence that LGBTQ adults (particularly lesbian, bisexual, and transgender women) experience disparities across several cardiovascular health metrics. These disparities vary by race, sex, sexual orientation, and gender identity. Future research in this area should incorporate longitudinal designs, elucidate physiological mechanisms, assess social and clinical determinants of cardiovascular health, and identify potential targets for behavioral interventions. There is a need to develop and test interventions that address multilevel stressors that affect the cardiovascular health of LGBTQ adults. Content on LGBTQ health should be integrated into health professions curricula and continuing education for practicing clinicians. Advancing the cardiovascular health of LGBTQ adults requires a multifaceted approach that includes stakeholders from multiple sectors to integrate best practices into health promotion and cardiovascular care of this population.

IMPORTANCETransgender is an umbrella term used to describe individuals whose gender identity and/or gender expression differs from assigned sex at birth. There are an estimated 1.4 million transgender adults in the United States, and this number is increasing. Clinicians will increasingly be caring for transgender patients. Topics considered in this narrative review include terminology, how to address transgender patients, obtaining an inclusive history that takes into account gender-affirming surgery, managing hormone therapy and other clinical issues, consideration for hospitalized patients, interpreting laboratory values in the setting of hormone use, legal issues, and considerations for health systems.OBSERVATIONS Best practices in caring for a transgender patient include using a patient-identified name and pronoun, using gender-neutral terminology until the appropriate term is identified by the patient, and obtaining a surgical history inclusive of an anatomic inventory. Gender-affirming hormones can modify disease-specific risk factors or confer risk for in-hospital complications. They can also cause changes in laboratory values; however, studies are limited to observational studies and case series. Some data are derived and extrapolated from cisgender populations. There are also unique systems-based concerns, including lack of procedures for standardized collection of gender identity and lack of sufficiently comprehensive electronic health record platforms. Vulnerabilities exist for hospitalized transgender patients in the transition from the inpatient to outpatient care that require dedicated institutional efforts to address. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCEClinicians should learn how to engage with transgender patients, appreciate that unique anatomy or the use of gender-affirming hormones may affect the prevalence of certain disease (eg, cardiovascular disease, venous thromboembolism, and osteoporosis), and be prepared to manage specific issues, including those related to hormone therapy. Health care facilities should work toward providing inclusive systems of care that correctly identify and integrate information about transgender patients into the electronic health record, account for the unique needs of these patients within the facility, and through education and policy create a welcoming environment for their care.

ittle is known about the neurologic health needs of sexual and gender minority (SGM) individuals (ie, those in the lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer [LGBTQ+] spectrum). Understanding an individual's identity is essential for patientcentered communication, which improves patient satisfaction and reduces health disparities. SGM identity directly impacts a variety of neurologic conditions, including epilepsy, 1 dementia, 2 and stroke. 3,4 Neurologists receive little to no dedicated SGM health training, 5 which may lead to conscious or unconscious behaviors that contribute to existing disparities. 6 A 2018 study 3 of US neurologists, for example, found that while most reported comfort in caring for SGM individuals, fewer demonstrated SGM-related medical knowledge. Nearly half of respondents believed that sexual orientation and gender identity had no bearing on the management of neurologic illness. 3 This scoping review seeks to describe the cur-rent state of science in SGM health in neurology to highlight areas of knowledge and gaps to inform future research. MethodsGuided by an experienced medical librarian (E.W.), we developed, tested, and finalized a PubMed search using medical subject headings and keywords with SGM descriptors 7 and neurologic disorders (eAppendix 1 in the Supplement). The disorders were compiled based on clinical expertise, the National Institute of Neurologic Disorders and Stroke website, 8 and prior research. 9 This search was modified for Embase, Web of Science, PsycInfo, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), and BIOSIS Previews. IMPORTANCE Little is known about the neurologic health needs of sexual and gender minority (SGM) individuals, and existing research indicates health care disparities for this group. OBJECTIVE To describe the current state of science in SGM neurology and highlight areas of knowledge and gaps to guide future research.EVIDENCE REVIEW All articles published before April 12, 2020, in PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, PsycInfo, CINAHL, and BIOSIS Previews were searched using a search string encompassing SGM descriptors and neurologic disorders. A total of 8359 items were found and entered into EndNote, and 2921 duplicates were removed. A blind title and abstract review was performed followed by full-text review in duplicate, with conflicts settled through consensus, to identify 348 articles eligible for data abstraction. Articles presenting primary data about an identified adult SGM population addressing a clinical neurology topic were included. Descriptive statistics were used for abstracted variables.FINDINGS Of 348 studies, 205 (58.9%) were case reports or series, 252 (72.4%) included sexual minority cisgender men, and 247 (70.9%) focused on HIV. An association was found between autism spectrum disorder and gender dysphoria in 9 of 16 studies (56.3%), and a higher risk of ischemic stroke in transgender women was shown in other studies. Literature in neuroinfectious disease, the most common topic, largely focused on HIV (173 of 200...

ObjectiveTo measure the attitudes and knowledge of American Academy of Neurology (AAN) member neurologists in caring for sexual and gender minority (SGM) patients (e.g., those who identify in the lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, or questioning [LGBTQ+] spectrum) to inform future educational offerings.MethodsA questionnaire was created in an iterative process by the LGBTQ+ Survey Task Force, consisting of 21 questions examining self-reported knowledge, attitudes, and clinical preparedness in caring for SGM patients. Participants responded to each statement with a 5-point Likert scale (“strongly disagree” to “strongly agree”). The survey was distributed via electronic and conventional mail to a random, representative sample of 1,000 AAN members.ResultsThe response rate was 13.5% (n = 135). Most respondents (60%–66%) were aware of local and national barriers that inhibit SGM individuals from using health care services; the majority (73%–91%) felt comfortable assessing SGM patients. Over half believed sexual orientation (SO) and gender identity (GI) to be social determinants of health (61% and 57%, respectively). Yet a third would not tailor neurologic care based on a patient's SGM identity, and 43% believed that SO/GI has no bearing on the management of neurologic illness.ConclusionsMost neurologists surveyed were aware of overarching barriers to care experienced by SGM individuals; however, a minority of respondents recognized the intersection of SGM identity with neurologic health. Our results highlight awareness gaps that could be addressed via targeted educational opportunities, ensuring that neurologists provide high-quality neurologic care to patients of all sexual orientations and gender identities.