Are we asking the right questions? Working with the LGBTQ+ community to prioritise healthcare research themes

Abstract Background Conversations about research priorities with members of the public are rarely designed specifically to include people who identify as Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender and Queer (LGBTQ+) not researchers. Methods Generally, address this gap, specifically, inform future for CLS, we carried out a rapid review published priority sets covering LGBTQ+ topics, an online workshop prioritise identified themes. Results Rapid review: results. The 18 sets. Some focussed on specific populations such women or men, younger older living within families. Five addressed transgender gender non- conforming populations. All originated from English-speaking, high middle-income countries (UK, US, Canada, Australia), date 2016 onwards. Prioritization approaches were wide-ranging personal commentary expert workshops surveys. Participants involved in setting mostly included academics, health practitioners advocacy organisations, two studies their process. Research then grouped into themes which prioritised during workshop. Workshop: For workshop, participants recruited using local (Cambridge, UK) networks national advert involvement matching website take part discussion Those that took offered payment time preparing taking part. experiences contributed consensus development process final ranked list seven participants’ healthcare, mental advocacy, care homes, caring responsibilities, schools family units added additional context. Conclusions From three were: healthcare services delivery , prevention, particular challenges / intersectionality multiple identifying LGBTQ+. interconnected many ways was demonstrated by comments participants. This paper offers insights why these important perspectives detail how run inclusive respectful exercise. On practical level will directly direction CLS.