ReviewCurrent opinion in urology2026
Urological care for sexual and gender minorities: a narrative review toward equitable care.
Review in Current opinion in urology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purpose of reviewSexual and gender minority (SGM) populations face persistent inequities in urological care, stemming from stigma, biased frameworks, and inadequate clinician training. This review synthesizes current evidence on SGM-specific urological needs and highlights the importance of equity-oriented approaches to improve clinical outcomes and patient experiences. RECENT
findingsAcross the urological care continuum, SGM populations experience lower cancer screening uptake, delayed diagnosis, poorer treatment-related quality of life, and unmet survivorship needs compared with cisgender and heterosexual populations. Traditional equality-based clinical guidelines frequently fail to account for anatomical diversity, gender-affirming hormone therapy, prior gender-affirming surgery, and psychosocial contexts that influence access to care and outcomes. In transgender and gender-diverse individuals, inconsistent application of organ-based screening, limited guidance following gender-affirming surgery, and under-recognition of long-term urological morbidity exacerbate inequities. Sexual and reproductive health needs, including trauma-informed care, fertility preservation, and inclusive approaches to sexual function, remain insufficiently integrated into routine urological practice. These disparities are reinforced by gaps in clinician knowledge and competence, limited collection of sexual orientation and gender identity data, and restrictive sociopolitical contexts. SUMMARY: Equitable urological care for SGM populations requires moving beyond uniform, equality-based models toward anatomy-aware, affirming, and patient-centered care. Integrating equity principles into urological practice, education, research, and institutional policies is essential to improving outcomes and quality of care for SGM populations.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
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.