Cited by 6LGBTQ Health, Identity, and PolicyGender, Sexuality, and EducationGender and Feminist Studies

The DOI matches its Crossref record, with a small difference in title or year.

Toward a Better Understanding of Discrimination Based on Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity

Abstract

In Latin America and the Caribbean (LAC) there is limited knowledge about the size of the LGBTQ population and their experiences of discrimination. This technical note, based on a compilation of studies in LAC, evidences the existing challenges and data gaps to measure the size of the LGBTQ population and their experiences of discrimination in the region. This document offers a selection of good practices for the collection of data related to LGBTQ population and provides recommendations for future surveys and studies on the subject with a focus on sample and instruments design to better address the theme of diverse sex orientations and gender identities.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.18235/0002306

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Metadata

Authors
Urban, A.-M., Ágreda, M. J. F., Ramos, A., & Ortiz, D.
Published
2020-04-23
OpenAlex
W3018175822
Cited by
6
References
0
Citations by year
2025: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 4
Type
report
Language
en
Open access
closed
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › LGBTQ Health, Identity, and Policy
  • Social Sciences › Gender Studies › Gender, Sexuality, and Education
  • Social Sciences › Gender Studies › Gender and Feminist Studies
Keywords
LGBTQ populations, sexual orientation, gender identity, discrimination, data collection, survey design, sample design, data gaps, Latin America and the Caribbean, sexual diversity

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