Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35270340›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of environmental research and public health2022

Restriction of Access to Healthcare and Discrimination of Individuals of Sexual and Gender Minority: An Analysis of Judgments of the European Court of Human Rights from an Ethical Perspective.

Tobias Skuban, Marcin Orzechowski, Florian Steger

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
2.2field-weighted citation impact, top 13% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. The Meaning of Sexual Well-being Among LGBTQ+ People in the Netherlands Using the Framework of Mitchell et al.International journal of sexual health : official journal of the World Association for Sexual Health · 2025
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Tobias SkubanKbo-Isar-Amper-Klinikum Region München, 85540 Haar, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-7754-6904
Marcin OrzechowskiInstitute of the History, Philosophy and Ethics of Medicine, Ulm University, 89073 Ulm, Germany.ORCID 0000-0003-4244-7989
Florian StegerInstitute of the History, Philosophy and Ethics of Medicine, Ulm University, 89073 Ulm, Germany.ORCID 0000-0001-8108-1591
Universität Ulm · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Individuals of sexual and gender minority (SGM) form a vulnerable group with specific healthcare needs that might be prone to experience discrimination and restrictions regarding their access to healthcare. As the judgments of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) offer a normative perspective on these issues, we analyzed them systematically (1) to identify whether and in what manner ECtHR's judgments concern restriction of access to healthcare for SGM individuals and (2) to identify and categorize the ways of discrimination to which SGM individuals are exposed. We conducted a systematic search of the database of the ECtHR's judgments with the use of specified search terms. Descriptive statistics were performed on the identified judgments. Subsequently, we analyzed the judgments with the use of a qualitative method of thematic analysis. We identified n = 73 cases relevant for our study. In n = 7 (9.59%) of judgments, we found limitations of access to healthcare for SGM individuals, e.g., in cases of restrictions for transsexual individuals to receive hormone or surgical therapy. We regard this as a specific form of discrimination. Furthermore, we identified five other categories of discrimination: restriction of parental rights, failure to respect one's gender identity/sexual orientation, discrimination by jurisdiction, prohibition of promotion, and verbal/physical attacks. The ECtHR proves to have a balanced view on the sensitive topic of sexual self-determination condemning any form of discrimination or restriction of access to healthcare. However, there is a need for further research on discriminatory acts by other individuals, e.g., healthcare providers, rather than by public authorities.

Indexed as

JudgmentSexual and Gender MinoritiesDelivery of Health CareFemaleGender IdentityHuman RightsHumansMaleSexual Behavioraccess to healthcarediscriminationethicsinternational lawLGBTQIvulnerable population

Identifiers

PMID35270340
PMCPMC8909593
OpenAlexW4214540972

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.