American journal of preventive medicine · 2020
Violence Victimization, Substance Use Disparities, and Gender-Nonconforming Youth.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Lowry Richard, Johns Michelle M, Robin Leah E
Аннотация
INTRODUCTION: Exposure to violence victimization may help explain disparities of substance use among gender-nonconforming youth (i.e., those whose gender expression differs from societal expectations).
METHODS: In 2015, three large urban school districts (2 in California and 1 in Florida) conducted a Youth Risk Behavior Survey that included the assessment of gender expression among a racially/ethnically diverse population-based sample of 6,082 high school students. Five categories of violence victimization were assessed (felt unsafe at school, threatened or injured with a weapon at school, bullied at school, electronically bullied, and forced sexual intercourse). In 2019, the effect of violence victimization on substance use disparities was examined by calculating sex-stratified prevalence ratios by gender nonconformity, adjusted for sexual identity, race/ethnicity, and grade (adjusted prevalence ratio 1 [APR1]), and comparing these with prevalence ratios adjusted for those variables plus violence victimization (adjusted prevalence ratio 2 [APR2]).
RESULTS: Among female students, only being threatened or injured with a weapon was significantly (p<0.05) associated with gender nonconformity and there were no substance use disparities by gender nonconformity. Among male students, every category of violence victimization was more prevalent among gender-nonconforming than among gender-conforming students and most substance use categories demonstrated significant gender nonconformity disparities. After controlling for violence victimization, these disparities decreased but remained statistically significant for the use of cocaine (APR1=2.84 vs APR2=1.99), methamphetamine (APR1=4.47 vs APR2=2.86), heroin (APR1=4.55 vs APR2=2.96), and injection drug use (APR1=7.90 vs APR2=4.72).
CONCLUSIONS: School-based substance use prevention programs may benefit from strategies that support gender diversity and reduce violence victimizations experienced by gender-nonconforming students, by providing a safe and supportive school environment.
METHODS: In 2015, three large urban school districts (2 in California and 1 in Florida) conducted a Youth Risk Behavior Survey that included the assessment of gender expression among a racially/ethnically diverse population-based sample of 6,082 high school students. Five categories of violence victimization were assessed (felt unsafe at school, threatened or injured with a weapon at school, bullied at school, electronically bullied, and forced sexual intercourse). In 2019, the effect of violence victimization on substance use disparities was examined by calculating sex-stratified prevalence ratios by gender nonconformity, adjusted for sexual identity, race/ethnicity, and grade (adjusted prevalence ratio 1 [APR1]), and comparing these with prevalence ratios adjusted for those variables plus violence victimization (adjusted prevalence ratio 2 [APR2]).
RESULTS: Among female students, only being threatened or injured with a weapon was significantly (p<0.05) associated with gender nonconformity and there were no substance use disparities by gender nonconformity. Among male students, every category of violence victimization was more prevalent among gender-nonconforming than among gender-conforming students and most substance use categories demonstrated significant gender nonconformity disparities. After controlling for violence victimization, these disparities decreased but remained statistically significant for the use of cocaine (APR1=2.84 vs APR2=1.99), methamphetamine (APR1=4.47 vs APR2=2.86), heroin (APR1=4.55 vs APR2=2.96), and injection drug use (APR1=7.90 vs APR2=4.72).
CONCLUSIONS: School-based substance use prevention programs may benefit from strategies that support gender diversity and reduce violence victimizations experienced by gender-nonconforming students, by providing a safe and supportive school environment.