Reassessing cardiometabolic health disparities among young adult sexual minority women: Evidence from a population-based cohort

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.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
PLoS ONE
Published
2026-10-13
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0358185
Primary Topic
LGBTQ Health, Identity, and Policy
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Reassessing cardiometabolic health disparities among young adult sexual minority women: Evidence from a population-based cohort

Alicia K. Matthews, Kate E. Keenan, Stephanie D. Stepp, KRISTEN WROBLEWSKI et al.
PLoS ONE
LGBTQ Health, Identity, and Policy
article

Reassessing cardiometabolic health disparities among young adult sexual minority women: Evidence from a population-based cohort

Alicia K. Matthews, Kate E. Keenan, Stephanie D. Stepp, KRISTEN WROBLEWSKI, Alida Bouris
article en

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.

PLoS ONEVol. 21(10)
University of Pittsburgh (US), University of Chicago (US), Rush University (US)
National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute
Openalex Percentile: Top 8%
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.