Logo image
Transgender-inclusive measures of sex/gender for population surveys: Mixed-methods evaluation and recommendations
Journal article - Review   Open access   Peer reviewed

Transgender-inclusive measures of sex/gender for population surveys: Mixed-methods evaluation and recommendations

Greta R. Bauer, Jessica Braimoh, Ayden I. Scheim and Christoffer Dharma
PloS one, v 12(5), e0178043
25 May 2017
PMID: 28542498
url
https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0178043&type=printableView
Published, Version of Record (VoR)CC BY V4.0 Open
url
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0178043View
Published, Version of Record (VoR) Open

Abstract

Multidisciplinary Sciences Science & Technology Science & Technology - Other Topics ESI Highly Cited Paper (Incites)
Given that an estimated 0.6% of the U.S. population is transgender (trans) and that large health disparities for this population have been documented, government and research organizations are increasingly expanding measures of sex/gender to be trans inclusive. Options suggested for trans community surveys, such as expansive check-all-that-apply gender identity lists and write-in options that offer maximum flexibility, are generally not appropriate for broad population surveys. These require limited questions and a small number of categories for analysis. Limited evaluation has been undertaken of trans-inclusive population survey measures for sex/gender, including those currently in use. Using an internet survey and follow-up of 311 participants, and cognitive interviews from a maximum-diversity sub-sample (n = 79), we conducted a mixed-methods evaluation of two existing measures: a two-step question developed in the United States and a multidimensional measure developed in Canada. We found very low levels of item missingness, and no indicators of confusion on the part of cisgender (non-trans) participants for both measures. However, a majority of interview participants indicated problems with each question item set. Agreement between the two measures in assessment of gender identity was very high (K = 0.9081), but gender identity was a poor proxy for other dimensions of sex or gender among trans participants. Issues to inform measure development or adaptation that emerged from analysis included dimensions of sex/gender measured, whether non-binary identities were trans, Indigenous and cultural identities, proxy reporting, temporality concerns, and the inability of a single item to provide a valid measure of sex/gender. Based on this evaluation, we recommend that population surveys meant for multi-purpose analysis consider a new Multidimensional Sex/Gender Measure for testing that includes three simple items (one asked only of a small sub-group) to assess gender identity and lived gender, with optional additions. We provide considerations for adaptation of this measure to different contexts.

Metrics

8 Record Views
324 citations in Scopus

Details

UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

This publication has contributed to the advancement of the following goals:

#3 Good Health and Well-Being
#5 Gender Equality

InCites Highlights

Data related to this publication, from InCites Benchmarking & Analytics tool:

Highly Cited Paper 
Web of Science research areas
Social Sciences, Interdisciplinary
Logo image