Reassessing cardiometabolic health disparities among young adult sexual minority women: Evidence from a population-based cohort
5 affiliations
- 1Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Neuroscience, University of Chicago, Chicago, Illinois, United States of America
- 2Department of Psychiatry, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, United States of America
- 3Crown Family School of Social Work, Policy, and Practice, University of Chicago, Chicago, Illinois, United States of America
- 4Department of Adult Health and Gerontological Nursing, Rush University, Chicago, Illinois, United States of America
- 5Department of Public Health Sciences, University of Chicago, Chicago, Illinois, United States of America
Abstract
Purpose: We compared objective measures of cardiometabolic health (CMH) between women who identify as lesbian/gay or bisexual (LGB) and women who identify as heterosexual. In addition, we aimed to test whether group differences in stress reactivity partially explained disparities in CMH health. Methods: Participants from a longitudinal study were identified for enrollment in 2017. The LGB group self-identified as LGB in 2017 (n = 239), and the heterosexual group identified as straight or heterosexual in each year that sexual identity was asked (study years 2010–2017) (n = 160). CMH was assessed via measurements and biomarkers, and stress reactivity via heart rate variability and cortisol levels during a social stress test. Participants also provided self-reports of stress and health. We tested group differences using sexual identity at Study Year 17, at the time of the visit, and as a proportion of years identifying as LGB. Results: Group differences were tested using t-tests for continuous measures, logistic regression for dichotomous measures, and repeated-measures ANOVA for change over time. There were no significant differences in measures of CMH or stress reactivity by sexual identity group. LGB participants had worse self-reported health and higher levels of stress compared to heterosexual participants. Conclusion: We discuss several frameworks for interpreting the present results of no differences in objective markers of health in the context of the existing literature, including developmental, socio-political, and methodological frameworks, and suggest directions for research to link the previous research with the results of the current study.
Related
- Triglyceride–HDL cholesterol–glucose body index and cardiometabolic multimorbidity: evidence from a national longitudinal cohort and a subplateau health-screening population
- Rural/Urban Disparities in Pneumococcal Vaccine Service Delivery Among the Fee-for-Service Medicare Population
- The effect of regional disparities in access to rehabilitation services on mortality among stroke patients : A Korean nationwide population-based retrospective cohort study
- Trends and disparities in cerebrovascular disease mortality among patients with bronchus and lung cancer in the United States, 1999–2020: a population-based retrospective study
- Trends and racial and ethnic disparities in prepregnancy obesity severity at first live birth in the US, 2015–2024: a population-based cross-sectional study
BibTeX
@article{keenan2026reassessing,
title = {{Reassessing cardiometabolic health disparities among young adult sexual minority women: Evidence from a population-based cohort}},
author = {Kate Keenan and Stephanie D. Stepp and Alida Bouris and Alicia K. Matthews and Kristen Wroblewski},
journal = {PLOS One},
year = {2026},
month = oct,
doi = {10.1371/journal.pone.0358185},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0358185},
note = {CC BY 4.0},
}
RIS
TY - JOUR
TI - Reassessing cardiometabolic health disparities among young adult sexual minority women: Evidence from a population-based cohort
AU - Kate Keenan
AU - Stephanie D. Stepp
AU - Alida Bouris
AU - Alicia K. Matthews
AU - Kristen Wroblewski
PY - 2026
DA - 2026/10/13
JO - PLOS One
DO - 10.1371/journal.pone.0358185
UR - https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0358185
AB - Purpose: We compared objective measures of cardiometabolic health (CMH) between women who identify as lesbian/gay or bisexual (LGB) and women who identify as heterosexual. In addition, we aimed to test whether group differences in stress reactivity partially explained disparities in CMH health. Methods: Participants from a longitudinal study were identified for enrollment in 2017. The LGB group self-identified as LGB in 2017 (n = 239), and the heterosexual group identified as straight or heterosexual in each year that sexual identity was asked (study years 2010–2017) (n = 160). CMH was assessed via measurements and biomarkers, and stress reactivity via heart rate variability and cortisol levels during a social stress test. Participants also provided self-reports of stress and health. We tested group differences using sexual identity at Study Year 17, at the time of the visit, and as a proportion of years identifying as LGB. Results: Group differences were tested using t-tests for continuous measures, logistic regression for dichotomous measures, and repeated-measures ANOVA for change over time. There were no significant differences in measures of CMH or stress reactivity by sexual identity group. LGB participants had worse self-reported health and higher levels of stress compared to heterosexual participants. Conclusion: We discuss several frameworks for interpreting the present results of no differences in objective markers of health in the context of the existing literature, including developmental, socio-political, and methodological frameworks, and suggest directions for research to link the previous research with the results of the current study.
SN - 1932-6203
ER -