The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The Promise of Digital Mental Health for LGBTQ+ Youths
Abstract
Lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, plus (LGBTQ+) youths face increased risk for psychiatric morbidity, and the stress of being in a minority group drives this disparity. Affirmative treatments can improve mental health among LGBTQ+ youths, but barriers are encountered in accessing care. Digital mental health offers the opportunity to increase access, therefore potentially reducing mental health disparities. However, insufficient attention has been devoted to addressing the needs of LGBTQ+ youths through digital tools. In this column, the authors outline strategies to improve the inclusiveness of existing digital mental health content and to move toward equitable care with the development of new content.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Many LGBTQ+ youth avoid seeking professional support for fear of encountering non-affirming providers, face geographic and financial constraints, or lack access to culturally competent services.
“many LGBTQ+ youth avoid seeking professional support for fear of encountering non-affirming providers, face geographic and financial constraints, or lack access to culturally competent services altogether (Liu et al., 2023;Cohen et al., 2022).”
From Artificial intelligence and immersive technologies for LGBTQ+ youth: a narrative review (2026) · cites this paper as Cohen et al., 2022
Fear of judgment, limited access to affirming professionals, and the possibility of encountering a clinician who pathologizes rather than supports their identity can make traditional mental health services feel unsafe or inaccessible for many LGBTQ+ young people.
“Fear of judgment, limited access to affirming professionals, and the possibility of encountering a clinician who pathologizes rather than supports their identity can make traditional mental health services feel unsafe or inaccessible (Cohen et al., 2022).”
From Artificial intelligence and immersive technologies for LGBTQ+ youth: a narrative review (2026) · cites this paper as Cohen et al., 2022
Citations
Cites
Development of the Gender Minority Stress and Resilience Measure.
Testa, R. J., Habarth, J., Peta, J., Balsam, K., & Bockting, W. (2015) · Psychology of Sexual Orientation and Gender Diversity · doi:10.1037/sgd0000081 · Cited by 1,406
Gilbey, D., Morgan, H., Lin, A., & Perry, Y. (2020) · Journal of Medical Internet Research · doi:10.2196/20158 · Cited by 112
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 8
- 10.1037/0033-2909.129.5.674 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1037/amp0000357 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.jadohealth.2016.11.023 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1016/j.brat.2021.103990 · DOI
- 10.2196/30241 · DOI
- 10.1080/15538605.2019.1662358 · DOI
- 10.1037/pspp0000282 · DOI
- 10.1037/cpp0000288 · DOI
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Artificial intelligence and immersive technologies for LGBTQ+ youth: a narrative review
Shekarchi, R., Eleuteri, S., Saladino, V., Calaresi, D., Giordano, F., & Prunas, A. (2026) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2026.2002054
Metadata
- Authors
- Cohen, J. M., Feinstein, B. A., & Fox, K.
- Affiliations
- Department of Psychiatry, Columbia University Irving Medical Center, New York City (Cohen); Department of Psychology, Rosalind Franklin University of Medicine and Science, Chicago (Feinstein); Department of Psychology, University of Denver, Denver (Fox). Dror Ben-Zeev, Ph.D., is editor of this column.
- Venue
- Psychiatric Services
- Published
- 2022-09-01
- Volume
- 73
- Issue
- 9
- Pages
- 1069-1072
- ISSN
- 1075-2730
- 1557-9700
- Cited by
- 12
- References
- 2
- Language
- en
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
