4
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Association of Coming Out as Lesbian, Gay, and Bisexual+ and Risk of Cigarette Smoking in a Nationally Representative Sample of Youth and Young Adults

      research-article
      , MPH 1 , , MPH 2 , , ScD, SM 3 , , PhD, MPH, MBA, MBBS 4 , , MD, MPH 5 , , MD, ScM 1 , 6 , , PhD 2 ,
      JAMA Pediatrics
      American Medical Association

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          This cohort study assesses whether young people who change their sexual identity are associated with having higher risk of cigarette smoking initiation and current smoking compared with those with consistent sexual identities.

          Key Points

          Question

          Is changing sexual identity associated with increased risk of cigarette smoking initiation and current smoking?

          Findings

          In this nationally representative cohort study of 7843 youth and young adults, those who changed their sexual identity from heterosexual to bisexual were more likely than those with consistent heterosexual identities to initiate smoking and be current smokers during 3 years of follow-up. There was no increased risk for youth and young adults changing from heterosexual to lesbian, gay, or other nonheterosexual identities.

          Meaning

          In this study, coming out as bisexual was associated with increased risk of initiating cigarette smoking and current smoking in youth and young adults.

          Abstract

          Importance

          Coming out as lesbian, gay, bisexual, or other identities besides heterosexual (LGB+) may represent a susceptible period for cigarette smoking initiation in youth and young adults.

          Objective

          To assess whether young people who change their sexual identity have higher risk of cigarette smoking initiation and current smoking compared with those with consistent sexual identities.

          Design, Setting, and Participants

          This cohort study used data from the nationally representative Population Assessment of Tobacco and Health study (wave 1, 2013-2014; wave 2, 2014-2015; wave 3, 2015-2016; wave 4, 2016-2018). Youth and young adults aged 14 to 29 years who were never smokers at wave 1 were included in this study. Analysis began October 2018 and ended June 2020.

          Exposures

          Consistent sexual identity (consistently heterosexual, consistently LGB+) vs changing sexual identity (coming out as LGB+, other LGB+ patterns) based on 4 waves of sexual identity data. Identities were further classified by distinguishing between bisexual and lesbian, gay, and other nonheterosexual identities.

          Main Outcomes and Measures

          Smoking initiation and current cigarette smoking at wave 4.

          Results

          Among 7843 individuals who never smoked at wave 1, 6991 (90.7%) reported a consistent sexual identity, and 852 (9.3%) changed sexual identity across waves. The mean (SE) baseline age of participants who reported consistent heterosexuality was 20.1 (0.8) years; consistently LGB+, 20.0 (3.7) years; coming out as LGB+, 18.0 (2.9) years, and other LGB+ pattern, 20.3 (3.8) years. A total of 14.1% (weighted) initiated smoking, and 6.3% were current smokers at wave 4. Compared with consistently heterosexual identities, coming out as LGB+ (23% vs 13%; odds ratio [OR], 1.72; 95% CI, 1.34-2.20), consistently LGB+ identities (17% vs 13%; OR, 1.45; 95% CI, 1.03-2.04), and other LGB+ patterns (17% vs 13%; OR, 1.47; 95% CI, 1.04-2.08) were positively associated with smoking initiation by wave 4. Compared with consistently heterosexual identities, ORs for smoking initiation were 2.24 (28% vs 13%; 95% CI, 1.72-2.92) for coming out as bisexual, 1.99 (23% vs 13%; 95% CI, 1.20-3.29) for consistently LGB+ with change to/from bisexual, and 2.20 (23% vs 13%; 95% CI, 1.40-3.46) for other LGB+ patterns with change to/from bisexual identity. Current smoking estimates were similar to those for smoking initiation.

          Conclusions and Relevance

          Compared with consistently heterosexual identities, changing sexual identity over follow-up was associated with smoking initiation and current smoking. The risk associated with changing sexual identities was concentrated among participants coming out as bisexual or reporting other changes in their identity to/from being bisexual. More research is needed on mechanisms underlying the association between changing sexual identity and smoking initiation to inform tailored prevention programs and tobacco regulations.

          Related collections

          Most cited references41

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Prejudice, social stress, and mental health in lesbian, gay, and bisexual populations: conceptual issues and research evidence.

          Ilan Meyer (2003)
          In this article the author reviews research evidence on the prevalence of mental disorders in lesbians, gay men, and bisexuals (LGBs) and shows, using meta-analyses, that LGBs have a higher prevalence of mental disorders than heterosexuals. The author offers a conceptual framework for understanding this excess in prevalence of disorder in terms of minority stress--explaining that stigma, prejudice, and discrimination create a hostile and stressful social environment that causes mental health problems. The model describes stress processes, including the experience of prejudice events, expectations of rejection, hiding and concealing, internalized homophobia, and ameliorative coping processes. This conceptual framework is the basis for the review of research evidence, suggestions for future research directions, and exploration of public policy implications.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Homosexual identity formation: a theoretical model.

            V C Cass (1979)
            A six-stage model of homosexual identity formation is outlined within the framework of interpersonal congruency theory. Stages are differentiated on the basis of the person's perceptions of his/her own behavior and the actions that arise as a consequence of this perception. The person is seen to have an active role in the acquisition of a homosexual identity. Alternative paths of development are proposed within each stage. The notion that people can accept homosexuality as a positively valued status is assumed. Several factors believed to be influential in determining whether a person takes one line of development or another are discussed. The model is intended to be applied to both female and male homosexuals.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Estimating predicted probabilities from logistic regression: different methods correspond to different target populations.

              We review three common methods to estimate predicted probabilities following confounder-adjusted logistic regression: marginal standardization (predicted probabilities summed to a weighted average reflecting the confounder distribution in the target population); prediction at the modes (conditional predicted probabilities calculated by setting each confounder to its modal value); and prediction at the means (predicted probabilities calculated by setting each confounder to its mean value). That each method corresponds to a different target population is underappreciated in practice. Specifically, prediction at the means is often incorrectly interpreted as estimating average probabilities for the overall study population, and furthermore yields nonsensical estimates in the presence of dichotomous confounders. Default commands in popular statistical software packages often lead to inadvertent misapplication of prediction at the means. Using an applied example, we demonstrate discrepancies in predicted probabilities across these methods, discuss implications for interpretation and provide syntax for SAS and Stata. Marginal standardization allows inference to the total population from which data are drawn. Prediction at the modes or means allows inference only to the relevant stratum of observations. With dichotomous confounders, prediction at the means corresponds to a stratum that does not include any real-life observations. Marginal standardization is the appropriate method when making inference to the overall population. Other methods should be used with caution, and prediction at the means should not be used with binary confounders. Stata, but not SAS, incorporates simple methods for marginal standardization. © The Author 2014; all rights reserved. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the International Epidemiological Association.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                JAMA Pediatr
                JAMA Pediatr
                JAMA Pediatr
                JAMA Pediatrics
                American Medical Association
                2168-6203
                2168-6211
                January 2021
                26 October 2020
                26 October 2020
                : 175
                : 1
                : 1-9
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Department of Epidemiology, Boston University School of Public Health, Boston, Massachusetts
                [2 ]Department of Global Health, Boston University School of Public Health, Boston, Massachusetts
                [3 ]Department of Health Law, Policy and Management, Boston University School of Public Health, Boston, Massachusetts
                [4 ]Annenberg School for Communication, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia
                [5 ]Section of General Internal Medicine, Department of Medicine, Boston University School of Medicine, Boston, Massachusetts
                [6 ]Department of Medicine, Boston University School of Medicine, Boston, Massachusetts
                Author notes
                Article Information
                Corresponding Author: Andrew C. Stokes, PhD, Boston University School of Public Health, 801 Massachusetts Ave, Boston, MA 02118 ( acstokes@ 123456bu.edu ).
                Accepted for Publication: June 23, 2020.
                Published Online: October 26, 2020. doi:10.1001/jamapediatrics.2020.3565
                Open Access: This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the CC-BY License. © 2020 Harlow AF et al. JAMA Pediatrics.
                Author Contributions: Ms Harlow and Dr Stokes had full access to all of the data in the study and take responsibility for the integrity of the data and the accuracy of the data analysis.
                Concept and design: Harlow, Raifman, Streed, Benjamin, Stokes.
                Acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data: Harlow, Lundberg, Tan, Streed, Stokes.
                Drafting of the manuscript: Harlow, Lundberg, Streed, Stokes.
                Critical revision of the manuscript for important intellectual content: All authors .
                Statistical analysis: Harlow, Lundberg, Stokes.
                Obtained funding: Benjamin, Stokes.
                Administrative, technical, or material support: Raifman, Stokes.
                Supervision: Streed, Stokes.
                Conflict of Interest Disclosures: Dr Benjamin is an uncompensated member of the MyHeartLab steering committee for Samsung, reports a principal investigator–initiated study from Samsung to University of California, San Francisco, and reports grants from the American Heart Association. Dr Stokes reports grants from Ethicon Inc outside the submitted work. No other disclosures were reported.
                Funding/Support: Research reported in this publication was supported by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute of the National Institutes of Health and the US Food and Drug Administration’s Center for Tobacco Products ( CTP) (grants P50HL120163, U54HL120163, and 1K01HL154130-01) and by the National Institute of Mental Health (grant K01 MH 116817).
                Role of the Funder/Sponsor: The funders had no role in the design and conduct of the study; collection, management, analysis, and interpretation of the data; preparation, review, or approval of the manuscript; and decision to submit the manuscript for publication.
                Disclaimer: The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Institutes of Health, the US Food and Drug Administration, or the American Heart Association.
                Article
                poi200064
                10.1001/jamapediatrics.2020.3565
                7589064
                33104174
                d976d4ae-d165-444c-b11d-88d7c3f395a5
                Copyright 2020 Harlow AF et al. JAMA Pediatrics.

                This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the CC-BY License.

                History
                : 31 March 2020
                : 23 June 2020
                Funding
                Funded by: National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute
                Funded by: National Institutes of Health
                Funded by: US Food and Drug Administration
                Funded by: Center for Tobacco Products
                Funded by: CTP
                Funded by: National Institute of Mental Health
                Categories
                Research
                Research
                Original Investigation
                Featured
                Online First
                Comments

                Comments

                Comment on this article