SynthesisNursing open2026
Determinants of Cardiovascular Disease Risk Among LGBTQ+ Populations: A Systematic Review of Empirical Evidence.
Synthesis in Nursing open, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundUnderstanding the multifactorial drivers of cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk in LGBTQ+ populations is critical to advancing equitable cardiovascular care.
objectiveTo evaluate and synthesize empirical evidence on factors influencing CVD risk among sexual minority populations.
methodsA systematic review was conducted following PRISMA guidelines. Five databases (PubMed, Scopus, MEDLINE, ScienceDirect and ProQuest) were searched for studies published between 2019 and 2024 that examined CVD risk factors among LGBTQ+ adults. Eligible studies were appraised using the Joanna Briggs Institute critical appraisal tool, and findings were synthesized using a convergent integrated approach.
resultsTwenty studies met the inclusion criteria, most of which were cross-sectional and conducted in high-income countries. Identified CVD risk factors were classified into six domains: behavioural (e.g., nicotine use, health behaviours, substance use), blood biomarker (e.g., lipid or total cholesterol, HbA1c, C-reactive protein), physical (e.g., BMI, blood pressure, age), comorbidities (e.g., metabolic syndrome, COPD, HIV), psychological (e.g., positive and negative factors) and social (e.g., discrimination, loneliness, marital status). Bisexual, lesbian and gay individuals were most frequently represented. Across studies, minority stress and adverse social determinants were consistently associated with elevated CVD risk.
conclusionSexual minority populations face disproportionate cardiovascular risk shaped by behavioural, biological and psychosocial stressors. These findings highlight the need for inclusive, culturally competent nursing practice and identity-informed screening strategies. IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING PRACTICE AND POLICY: Nurses should integrate sexual orientation and gender identity into cardiovascular risk assessments, adopt trauma-informed and resilience-promoting approaches, and advocate for policies that reduce structural barriers to equitable care. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: No patients or members of the public were directly involved in the design, conduct or reporting of this systematic review.
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.