Flourishing Levels Among LGBTQ+ Graduate Students in Health Fields: A Quantitative Analysis of the Healthy Minds Survey

Increasing workforce diversity in health professions is critical to reducing health disparities in marginalized populations, yet little is known about the well-being of LGBTQ+ graduate students pursuing careers as health providers. This study examined whether LGBTQ+ graduate students in health professions programs experience lower rates of flourishing compared to their heterosexual/cisgender peers. Using data from the Healthy Minds Study (2024-2025) of U.S. graduate health professions students (<i>N</i> = 3,008), we employed descriptive statistics, chi-square tests, and logistic regression to assess flourishing disparities and identify protective factors. LGBTQ+ students (<i>n</i> = 649) demonstrated significantly lower odds of flourishing (OR = 0.516; 95% CI: 0.424-0.628). In the full sample, significant predictors of flourishing included sex/gender, race/ethnicity, age, field of study, school belonging, depression, and anxiety (all <i>p</i> < 0.001). Within the LGBTQ+ subsample, depression emerged as the strongest barrier to flourishing (OR = 0.175; 95% CI: 0.113-0.270) and school belonging as the most protective (OR = 1.969; 95% CI: 1.357-2.857). Race/ethnicity and anxiety were not significant predictors in this subsample. Findings underscore substantial flourishing disparities for LGBTQ+ graduate health professions students and identify school belonging as a critical intervention target.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Homosexuality
Published
2026-02-18
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1080/00918369.2026.2621160
Primary Topic
LGBTQ Health, Identity, and Policy
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Flourishing Levels Among LGBTQ+ Graduate Students in Health Fields: A Quantitative Analysis of the Healthy Minds Survey

Caroline Dorsen, Ping-Hsin Chen, K. J. Shapiro, N. Shimoni et al.
Journal of Homosexuality
LGBTQ Health, Identity, and Policy
article

Flourishing Levels Among LGBTQ+ Graduate Students in Health Fields: A Quantitative Analysis of the Healthy Minds Survey

Caroline Dorsen, Ping-Hsin Chen, K. J. Shapiro, N. Shimoni, C. F. Bright
article en

Abstract

Increasing workforce diversity in health professions is critical to reducing health disparities in marginalized populations, yet little is known about the well-being of LGBTQ+ graduate students pursuing careers as health providers. This study examined whether LGBTQ+ graduate students in health professions programs experience lower rates of flourishing compared to their heterosexual/cisgender peers. Using data from the Healthy Minds Study (2024-2025) of U.S. graduate health professions students (<i>N</i> = 3,008), we employed descriptive statistics, chi-square tests, and logistic regression to assess flourishing disparities and identify protective factors. LGBTQ+ students (<i>n</i> = 649) demonstrated significantly lower odds of flourishing (OR = 0.516; 95% CI: 0.424-0.628). In the full sample, significant predictors of flourishing included sex/gender, race/ethnicity, age, field of study, school belonging, depression, and anxiety (all <i>p</i> < 0.001). Within the LGBTQ+ subsample, depression emerged as the strongest barrier to flourishing (OR = 0.175; 95% CI: 0.113-0.270) and school belonging as the most protective (OR = 1.969; 95% CI: 1.357-2.857). Race/ethnicity and anxiety were not significant predictors in this subsample. Findings underscore substantial flourishing disparities for LGBTQ+ graduate health professions students and identify school belonging as a critical intervention target.

Journal of Homosexuality
East Tennessee State University (US), Rutgers Sexual and Reproductive Health and Rights (NL), New York University (US)
Openalex Percentile: Top 58%
LGBTQ Health, Identity, and Policy
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.