Dataset Information

Differential Effects of State Policy Environments on Substance Use by Sexual Identity: Findings From the 2000-2015 National Alcohol Surveys.

ABSTRACT:

Introduction

This study explored whether structural stigma, defined by U.S. state policies related to sexual minority rights, moderated the relationship between sexual identity identity and heavy drinking, alcohol problems, and marijuana use among men and women.

Methods

Using combined data from the National Alcohol Survey (NAS) series (2000, 2005, 2010, and 2015), the sample included 11,115 men (421 sexual minority and 10,694 heterosexual) and 14,395 women (413 sexual minority and 13,982 heterosexual). State policy environment was assessed using a time-varying dichotomous indicator of comprehensive protections for sexual minorities (4-6 protections vs. limited or no protections). Gender-stratified logistic regression analyses examined the differential effect of the policy environment by sexual identity on three past-year substance use outcomes: high-intensity drinking (8+ drinks/day), any DSM-5 alcohol use disorder, and marijuana use.

Results

Among women, sexual minority status was associated with increased odds of all alcohol and marijuana use outcomes. Among men, sexual minority status was associated with decreased odds of high-intensity drinking but increased use of marijuana. Comprehensive policy protections were associated significantly decreased odds of high-intensity drinking among sexual minority men and marginally significant decreases among women.

Conclusions

Comprehensive policy protections appear to be protective for high-intensity drinking among sexual minority men and women. Findings underscore the importance of supportive policies in reducing risk of alcohol-related problems among sexual minorities.

SUBMITTER: Drabble LA

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8356226 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectivesTo assess the association between tobacco and hazardous alcohol use and sexual orientation and whether such an association could be explained by other sociodemographic characteristics.DesignCross-sectional household survey conducted in 2014-2016.SettingEngland, UK.ParticipantsRepresentative English population sample (pooled n=43 866).Main outcomesSexual orientation identity (lesbian/gay, bisexual, heterosexual, prefer-not-to-say); current tobacco and hazardous alcohol use (defined as Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test Score ≥8). All outcomes were self-reported.ResultsDue to interactions between sexual orientation and gender for substance use, analyses were stratified by gender. Tobacco use prevalence was significantly higher among lesbian/gay (women: 24.9%, 95% CI 19.2% to 32.6%; men: 25.9%, 95% CI 21.3% to 31.0%) and bisexual participants (women: 32.4%, 95% CI 25.9% to 39.6%; men: 30.7%, 95% CI 23.7% to 30.7%) and significantly lower for prefer-not-to-say participants in women (15.5%, 95% CI 13.5% to 17.8%) but not men (22.7%, 95% CI 20.3% to 25.3%) compared with heterosexual participants (women: 17.5%, 95% CI 17.0% to 18.0%; men: 20.4%, 95% CI 19.9% to 21.0%; p<0.001 for omnibus test). Similarly, hazardous alcohol use was significantly more prevalent for lesbian/gay (women: 19.0%, 95% CI 14.0% to 25.3%; men: 30.0%, 25.2%-35.3%) and bisexual participants (women: 24.4%, 95% CI 18.7% to 31.3%; men: 24.3%, 95% CI 17.9% to 32.1%) and lower for prefer-not-to-say participants (women: 4.1%, 95% CI 3.0% to 5.4%; men: 13.7%; 95% CI 11.8% to 16.0%) compared with heterosexuals (women: 8.3%, 95% CI 7.9% to 8.7%; men: 18.4%, 95% CI 17.9% to 18.9%; p<0.001 for omnibus test). However, after adjusting for sociodemographic confounders, tobacco use was similar across all sexual orientation groups among both women and men. By contrast, sexual orientation differences in hazardous alcohol use remained even after adjustment among women but not for bisexual and gay men.ConclusionsIn England, higher rates of tobacco use among sexual minority men and women appear to be attributable to other sociodemographic factors. Higher rates of hazardous alcohol use among sexual minority men may also be attributable to these factors, whereas this is not the case for sexual minority women.

Project description:Rationale: Minority sexual identity appears to confer asthma risks. Although associations between inhaled substances and asthma are established, these have not been examined among sexual minority youths. Given sexual minority adolescents' disproportionately high rates of substance use, research is needed to fill this important gap.Objectives: Using a representative sample of adolescents from the United States, we 1) examined associations among asthma, sexual identity, and inhaled substance use and tested 2a) whether sexual identity moderates relationships between asthma and inhaled substance use and 2b) whether inhaled substance use mediates associations between sexual identity and asthma.Methods: Data are from the 2015 and 2017 Youth Risk Behavior Surveillance Survey. Adolescents (n = 30,113) reported if they were ever diagnosed with asthma, current use of cigarettes, cigars and/or cigarillos, marijuana, and electronic vapor products and if they ever used inhalants or synthetic marijuana. We used logistic regression to examine associations between asthma, sexual identity, and inhaled substance use controlling for age, race or ethnicity, and body mass index percentile, stratified by sex.Results: Lesbian, gay, and bisexual respondents had higher relative risks for asthma than heterosexual youth. Sexual minority female youths had significantly higher relative risks than heterosexual female youths for use of every inhaled substance. There were few sexual identity differences in inhaled substance use among male youths. Inhaled substance use was significantly associated with higher risks for asthma. In general, associations between each individual inhaled substance and asthma did not differ between sexual minority and heterosexual youths. However, when all inhaled substances were added into the models concurrently, inhaled substance use appeared to mediate associations with asthma among lesbian and bisexual female youths, and partially mediated these associations among sexual minority male youths.Conclusions: Sexual identity and inhaled substance use appear to play important roles in asthma risk. However, these variables do not fully explain the risk, suggesting that other unmeasured variables (e.g., stress and victimization) may be implicated in risks for both inhaled substance use and asthma. It is important that clinicians providing care to adolescents ask about sexual identity and inhaled substance use. Effective approaches to reducing inhaled substance use among adolescents, especially sexual minorities, are needed.

Project description:Legislation has been passed in some states to reduce discrimination and victimization toward sexual and gender minority people (SGM; people who are not solely heterosexual and/or whose gender identity is not equal to what is socially associated with sex assigned at birth). The purpose of these analyses is to test whether state-level policy environments are associated with past-year discrimination and victimization among SGM people. Cross-sectional data from The Population Research in Identity and Disparities for Equality (PRIDE) Study annual questionnaire (collected 2018-2019), a national study of the health of SGM adults in the USA, were used for these analyses. Measures included related to discrimination, victimization, and demographic characteristics. State-level policy environments were measured using data from the Movement Advancement Project. Logistic regression analyses evaluated state-level policy environment scores and past-year discrimination and victimization among gender identity categories. In this sample, 7044 people (gender minority n = 2530) were included. Cisgender sexual minority (odds ratio [OR] = 1.007, p = 0.041) and the gender expansive subgroup of gender minority people (OR = 1.010, p = 0.047) in states with more protective policy environments had greater odds of discrimination. The gender expansive subgroup was found to have greater odds of victimization in states with more protective policy environments (OR = 1.003, p < 0.05). There was no relationship between state-level policy environments and victimization among any other study groups. SGM people may experience increased risk for discrimination and victimization despite legislative protections, posing continued risks for poor health outcomes and marginalization. Evaluation of factors (e.g., implementation strategies, systems of accountability) that influence the effectiveness of state-level polices on the reported experiences of discrimination and victimization among SGM people is needed.