Dataset Information

Gender harmony: improved standards to support affirmative care of gender-marginalized people through inclusive gender and sex representation.

ABSTRACT:

Objective

Accurate representation of clinical sex and gender identity in interoperable clinical systems is a major challenge for organizations intent on improving outcomes for sex- and gender-marginalized people. Improved data collection has been hindered by the historical approach that presumed a single, often binary, datum was sufficient. We describe the Health Level Seven International (HL7) Gender Harmony logical model that proposes an improved approach.

Materials and methods

The proposed solution was developed via an American National Standards Institute (ANSI)-certified collaborative balloted process. As an HL7 Informative Document, it is an HL7 International-balloted consensus on the subject of representing sex and representing gender in clinical systems based on work of the gender harmony project led by the HL7 Vocabulary Work Group.

Results

The Gender Harmony Model is a logical model that provides a standardized approach that is both backwards-compatible and an improvement to the meaningful capture of gender identity, recorded sex or recorded gender, a sex for clinical use, the name to use, and pronouns that are affirmative and inclusive of gender-marginalized people.

Conclusion

Most clinical systems and current standards in health care do not meaningfully address, nor do they consistently represent, sex and gender diversity, which has impeded interoperability and led to suboptimal health care. The Gender Harmony Project was formed to create more inclusive health information exchange standards to enable a safer, higher-quality, and embracing healthcare experience. The Gender Harmony Model provides the informative guidance for standards developers to implement a more thorough technical design that improves the narrow binary design used in many legacy clinical systems.

SUBMITTER: McClure RC

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8757317 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:IntroductionIn the context of a population that is growing older, and a number of high-profile scandals about care standards in hospital and community settings, having a skilled and knowledgeable workforce caring for older people is an ethical and policy imperative. Support workers make up the majority of the workforce in health and social care services for older people (aged 65 years and over), and yet little is known about the best way to facilitate their development. Given this gap, this review will draw on evidence to address the question: how can workforce development interventions improve the skills and the care standards of support workers within older people's health and social care services?Methods and analysisAs we are interested in how and why workforce development interventions might work, in what circumstances and with whom, we will conduct a realist review, sourcing evidence from health, social care, policing and education. The review will be conducted in four steps over 18 months to (1) construct a theoretical framework, that is, the review's programme theories; (2) retrieve, review and synthesise evidence relating to interventions designed to develop the support workforce guided by the programme theories; (3) 'test out' our synthesis findings and refine the programme theories, establish their practical relevance/potential for implementation and (4) formulate recommendations about improvements to current workforce development interventions to contribute to the improvement of care standards in older people's health and social care services, potentially transferrable to other services.Ethics and disseminationEthical approval is not required to undertake this review. Knowledge exchange activities through stakeholder engagement and online postings are embedded throughout the lifetime of the project. The main output from this review will be a new theory driven framework for skill development for the support workforce in health and social care for older people.Trial registration numberCRD42013006283.

Project description:BackgroundSince the ruling handed down by the Austrian Constitutional Court in 2018 intersex variation has been recognized under Austrian law as a "third sex". In order to ensure that people with intersex variation are not discriminated against based on their group membership affirmative actions (i.e., proactive practices to avert discrimination) can be implemented. The current study explored whether students and employees at an Austrian medical university know about intersex variation. Furthermore, the study investigated what affirmative actions are practiced at the medical university to be inclusive for intersex persons and students' and employees' support for such affirmative actions.MethodsAll students and employees of a medical university in Austria were invited by e-mail to participate at the current study that included a self-constructed knowledge test on intersex variation with ten true-false questions. On five-point Likert scales participants reported for each of twelve listed affirmative actions whether they had seen a certain affirmative action at their university and how important they thought the implementation of an affirmative action was. Finally, participants' gender, age, sexual orientation, highest level of education, and nationality was assessed. A cluster analysis was performed to determine groups of people with different degrees of support for affirmative actions for intersex persons.Results220 students (62% cisgender women, 38% cisgender men) and 200 employees (72% cisgender women, 28% cisgender men) participated. Participants responded correctly to three out of ten knowledge test questions. The cluster analysis revealed that participants could be clustered as heterosexual cisgender women (Cluster 1; 55%), heterosexual cisgender men (Cluster 2; 30%), or sexual minority cisgender women and men (Cluster 3; 15%). Sexual minority persons knew more about intersex variation than did heterosexual participants. On average, affirmative actions for the inclusivity of intersex people have not been encountered (M = 1.5, SD = 0.4) at the studied university. Participants, especially those in Cluster 3, believed that the listed actions are moderately important.ConclusionsAt the medical university many actions should be taken to increase inclusivity for intersex people. Increasing the knowledge of university staff and students concerning intersex might help increase their support for such actions.