↓ Skip to main content

Scrambling for access: availability, accessibility, acceptability and quality of healthcare for lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people in South Africa

Overview of attention for article published in BMC International Health and Human Rights, May 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (69th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
9 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
10 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
121 Mendeley
Title
Scrambling for access: availability, accessibility, acceptability and quality of healthcare for lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people in South Africa
Published in
BMC International Health and Human Rights, May 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12914-017-0124-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Alex Müller

Abstract

Sexual orientation and gender identity are social determinants of health for people identifying as lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT), and health disparities among sexual and gender minority populations are increasingly well understood. Although the South African constitution guarantees sexual and gender minority people the right to non-discrimination and the right to access to healthcare, homo- and transphobia in society abound. Little is known about LGBT people's healthcare experiences in South Africa, but anecdotal evidence suggests significant barriers to accessing care. Using the framework of the UN International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights General Comment 14, this study analyses the experiences of LGBT health service users using South African public sector healthcare, including access to HIV counselling, testing and treatment. A qualitative study comprised of 16 semi-structured interviews and two focus group discussions with LGBT health service users, and 14 individual interviews with representatives of LGBT organisations. Data were thematically analysed within the framework of the UN International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights General Comment 14, focusing on availability, accessibility, acceptability and quality of care. All interviewees reported experiences of discrimination by healthcare providers based on their sexual orientation and/or gender identity. Participants recounted violations of all four elements of the UN General Comment 14: 1) Availability: Lack of public health facilities and services, both for general and LGBT-specific concerns; 2) Accessibility: Healthcare providers' refusal to provide care to LGBT patients; 3) Acceptability: Articulation of moral judgment and disapproval of LGBT patients' identity, and forced subjection of patients to religious practices; 4) Quality: Lack of knowledge about LGBT identities and health needs, leading to poor-quality care. Participants had delayed or avoided seeking healthcare in the past, and none had sought out accountability or complaint mechanisms within the health system. Sexual orientation and gender identity are important categories of analysis for health equity, and lead to disparities in all four dimensions of healthcare access as defined by General Comment 14. Discriminatory and prejudicial attitudes by healthcare providers, combined with a lack of competency and knowledge are key reasons for these disparities in South Africa.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 9 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 121 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
South Africa 1 <1%
Unknown 120 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 24 20%
Student > Master 20 17%
Student > Doctoral Student 17 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 9%
Researcher 10 8%
Other 23 19%
Unknown 16 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 28 23%
Nursing and Health Professions 24 20%
Social Sciences 17 14%
Psychology 13 11%
Arts and Humanities 6 5%
Other 11 9%
Unknown 22 18%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 23 May 2018.
All research outputs
#3,514,027
of 13,597,019 outputs
Outputs from BMC International Health and Human Rights
#172
of 356 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#81,084
of 266,704 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC International Health and Human Rights
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 13,597,019 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 74th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 356 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.8. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 51% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 266,704 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them