Skip to main content
NCBI home page
American Journal of Public Health logoLink to American Journal of Public Health
. 2016 Mar;106(3):527–533. doi: 10.2105/AJPH.2015.302976

The Effects of Cumulative Victimization on Mental Health Among Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender Adolescents and Young Adults

Brian Mustanski 1,✉, Rebecca Andrews 1, Jae A Puckett 1
PMCID: PMC4815715  PMID: 26794175

Abstract

Objectives. To examine the effects of the cumulative victimization experienced by lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender youths on mental disorders.

Methods. We recruited 248 participants from the Chicago, Illinois, area in 7 waves of data collected over 4 years, beginning in 2007 (83.1% retention rate). Mean age at enrollment was 18.7 years, and 54.7% were Black. We measured depression and posttraumatic stress disorder using structured psychiatric interviews.

Results. Latent class analyses of victimization over time identified a 4-class solution. Class 1 (65.4%) had low, decreasing victimization. Class 2 (10.3%) had moderate, increasing victimization. Class 3 (5.1%) had high, steady victimization. Class 4 (19.2%) had high, decreasing victimization. Controlling for baseline diagnoses and birth sex, lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender youths in classes 2 and 3 were at higher risk for depression than were those in class 1; youths in classes 2, 3, and 4 were at elevated risk for posttraumatic stress disorder.

Conclusions. Lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender youths with steadily high or increasing levels of victimization from adolescence to early adulthood are at higher risk for depression and posttraumatic stress disorder.

Lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) people experience greater mental health problems, such as depression, anxiety, suicide attempts,1,2 and posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD),3 as well as physical health disparities (e.g., cardiovascular disease4), than do heterosexual and cisgender individuals (cisgender refers to those who are not transgender, i.e., their gender identity matches what is typically socially ascribed to those with their sex assigned at birth). Research with nationally representative samples has revealed greater odds of psychological distress among sexual minority youths than among heterosexuals.1,5,6 Additionally, community-based samples of LGBT youths have shown that as many as 30% may experience psychological distress at clinically significant levels—including symptoms of somatization, depression, and anxiety.7,8 LGBT youths experience greater stressors from childhood into early adulthood, such as child abuse and unstable housing, that exacerbate mental health problems, such as depression and anxiety,1,9,10 and they face a host of minority stressors specific to their sexual and gender minority identities.

In the minority stress model,11,12 both proximal and distal stressors, such as internalized homophobia, stigma consciousness, identity concealment, and experiencing heterosexism and victimization, are mechanisms that explain the higher rates of mental health problems in sexual minorities, and similar mechanisms have been hypothesized for transgender individuals.13 One of the most consistent predictors of mental health issues for LGBT individuals is experiencing discrimination, harassment, and victimization, which LGBT youths experience disproportionately compared with heterosexual14–18 and cisgender youths.19 For example, a study with a community-based sample of LGBT youths found that 94% had experienced some form of sexual orientation–based victimization.20 In addition, victimization has been associated with greater psychological distress (including symptoms of somatization and anxiety),20 depression,21 substance use,22 suicide attempts,23,24 and PTSD.25

As adults, LGBT individuals continue to report high rates of sexual orientation–based or gender identity–based discrimination, harassment, and victimization.26–30 In addition, longitudinal investigations have shown that LGB individuals experience greater victimization and stressful life events than do heterosexuals over time.31,32 Even so, longitudinal studies with large national samples do not regularly measure sexual orientation–based victimization and instead measure victimization more generally. The accumulation of these sexual orientation–specific stressors and repeated marginalization can exacerbate mental health problems, although more longitudinal research in this area with LGBT samples is needed. In addition, research may reveal predictors of LGBT individuals who are the most at risk for continued longstanding victimization, which could elucidate subgroups to target in intervention and prevention efforts to decrease mental health problems.

From a life course perspective, marginalized groups may be at greater risk for mental and physical health problems later in life because of the accumulation of stressors over time instead of isolated and discrete events.33 In addition, individuals may experience “stress proliferation,” which is the production of new stressors that result from previous stressful life events and in turn exacerbate mental health problems and decrease an individual’s ability to cope.33,34 Similarly, stress sensitization theory highlights that repeated experiences of stressors impair the stress response system,34 which also can affect individuals on a biological level. For example, repeated exposure to stress can exacerbate allostatic load35 and disrupt cortisol levels.36,37 Much of the research applying these theories has been conducted with racial minorities and individuals from lower socioeconomic statuses, and even though both LGBT youths and adults report high levels of victimization, longitudinal research in this area is very limited.

Although there is a dearth of research on cumulative patterns of sexual orientation–based victimization for LGBT youths, research shows that, overall, LGB youths experience more victimization than do heterosexuals.31,32 In addition, some research with heterosexuals has examined trajectories of victimization more generally. For example, a 4-year study of adolescents found 4 trajectories that characterized victimization patterns.38 They found that most participants (80%) had low levels of victimization across the study but that others had moderate victimization levels that declined progressively (16%), high victimization that quickly declined (2.2%), and low levels of victimization that increased (2.0%).

Although this study did not examine how these trajectories related to mental health—and in fact very few studies have examined cumulative victimization and mental health—a study with a heterosexual sample found that as victimization and experiences of adversity increase across the lifetime, levels of depression also increase.39 In addition, individuals with multiple forms of victimization have been shown to have higher levels of trauma symptoms.40 Because of the greater risk of victimization in LGBT individuals compared with heterosexuals starting as early as adolescence,18 research is needed that examines how trajectories of sexual orientation–based victimization across development influence the risk for mental health problems for LGBT people.

Although LGBT people experience high levels of victimization, we do not know how patterns of victimization change over time, nor do we know how those trajectories of victimization affect psychiatric disorders. Therefore, we sought to (1) further validate a measure of victimization using item response theory (IRT) analyses, (2) identify trajectories of victimization in LGBT youths transitioning from adolescence to emerging adulthood, and (3) determine how these trajectories relate to depression and PTSD, using structured clinical interviews. As psychiatric disorders also were measured at the baseline assessment, we had the substantial advantage of being able to estimate victimization pattern effects across development on the emergence of psychiatric disorders over the course of our study (i.e., controlling for disorders at baseline).

METHODS

Participants were 248 LGBT youths from an ongoing longitudinal study, Project Q2. Previous publications provide detailed information about study recruitment and inclusion criteria.7,41,42 In brief, we used incentivized peer recruitment, whereby we compensated participants $10 for each peer they recruited for the study, to recruit the sample. We recruited initial participants (“seeds”) from the Chicago, Illinois, area through e-mail advertisements, cards, and flyers posted in spaces serving large numbers of LGBT youths. Previous studies have found no differences in mental health on the basis of recruitment source.7 To be eligible for participation, individuals needed to identify as LGBT or report same-sex attractions.

Of the initial sample, 234 participants (53% female) met the age requirement (aged 16–20 years) at baseline—which we determined using identification-based age verification at later waves—and were included in study analyses. Of those participants we excluded from the analytic sample, 6 were younger than 16 years at baseline and 8 were older than 20 years. Data collection began in April 2007 and participants completed their seventh wave of data 4 years after their baseline visit. We collected data every 6 months, with the exception of the sixth wave, which occurred 1.5 years from the fifth wave. Retention was high at all follow-ups (77.0%–89.9%), and 206 participants from the age-verified sample (83.1%) were still active at the seventh wave of data collection.43

Measures

LGBT victimization.

We administered a frequently used 10-item measure44–46 of LGBT-specific victimization. Participants used a 4-point scale (range = 0 [never] to 3 [≥ 3 times]) to identify the frequency with which they experienced verbal and physical threats or assault in the past 6 months because they “are, or were thought to be, gay, lesbian, bisexual, or transgender.” For psychometric analyses, we dichotomized the response categories (0 = never, 1 = at least 1 time) because of low endorsement for victimization experiences that occurred more than once.47 The internal reliability of this measure was high at each time point (all α > 0.76; average α = 0.84).

Depression and posttraumatic stress disorder.

We conducted developmentally appropriate, computer-guided, and interviewer-administered structured psychiatric interviews at baseline and the seventh wave of data collection to assess mental health diagnoses in the past year. We administered the Computerized Diagnostic Interview Schedule for Children, version IV (C-DISC-IV48) at baseline and the Computerized Diagnostic Interview Schedule, version IV (C-DIS-IV49) at the 48-month follow-up. The C-DISC and C-DIS are widely used structured clinical interviews for psychiatric diagnoses in adolescents and young adults.50 We employed extensive training of lay interviewers along with ongoing fidelity supervision from a clinical psychologist.50 We used diagnoses from the major depressive disorder (MDD) and PTSD modules for these analyses.

Statistical Analysis

We conducted latent class growth analyses (LCGA) to identify classes characterized by distinct victimization trajectories. This type of analysis allowed us to examine growth factor variations (i.e., both intercept and linear slopes of the trajectories) across classes (e.g., high vs low intercepts with increasing vs decreasing trajectories). We conducted descriptive analyses to evaluate demographic differences across the LCGA classes. We included latent classes in logistic regression analyses as predictors of PTSD and MDD at the 48-month follow-up. We also included baseline diagnoses of PTSD and MDD as predictors in the model to estimate the unique effect of observed victimization trajectories after adjusting for preexisting mental disorders.

At each step in the analysis, we evaluated model (comparative fit index, root mean square error of approximation, Bayesian information criteria, entropy) and item metrics (parameter estimates, difficulty and discrimination values) to detect ill-fitting items and identify the best fitting model. We ran logistic regressions in SPSS version 21 (IBM, Somers, NY), and we performed LCGA analyses with Mplus version 7.11 (Muthen & Muthen, Los Angeles, CA).

The classic (e.g., frequencies, correlations, factor analyses) and modern (i.e., IRT) psychometric analyses that we conducted on the victimization items are available in Appendix A (available as a supplement to the online version of this article at http://www.ajph.org).

RESULTS

Demographic characteristics of the sample at baseline and the 48-month follow-up are presented in Table 1. Logistic regression analyses indicated that birth sex (i.e., sex assigned at birth, not gender identity) was the only demographic characteristic to predict attrition at the 48-month follow-up; although retention was very high overall, females were significantly more likely to participate in this interview than were males (odds ratio [OR] = 2.01; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.12, 4.51; P < .05).

TABLE 1—

Description of Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender Youths Sample at Baseline and the 48-Month Follow-Up: Chicago, IL, 2007–2013

Characteristic Baseline (n = 234), No. (%) 48-Mo Follow-Up (n = 190), No. (%)
Birth sex
 Male 110 (47.0) 83 (43.7)
 Female 124 (53.0) 107 (56.3)
Gender identity
 Male 100 (42.7) 74 (38.9)
 Female 115 (49.1) 105 (55.3)
 Transgender 17 (7.3) 9 (4.7)
Sexual orientation
 Gay or lesbian 143 (61.1) 119 (62.6)
 Bisexual 66 (28.2) 47 (24.7)
 Questioning, unsure, or other 23 (9.8) 16 (8.4)
Race/ethnicity
 White 35 (15.0) 28 (14.7)
 Black 128 (54.7) 105 (55.3)
 Latina or Latino 29 (12.4) 24 (12.6)
 Other 42 (17.9) 33 (17.4)
Living situation
 Living with parents 138 (59.0) 64 (33.7)
 Other stable housing 69 (29.5) 118 (62.1)
 Unstable housing 25 (10.7) 7 (3.7)
Education
 Partial high school or less 105 (44.9) 18 (9.5)
 High school graduate 60 (25.6) 52 (27.4)
 Partial college 53 (22.6) 78 (41.1)
 College graduate 14 (6.0) 41 (21.6)
Mental health diagnoses
 Depression 34 (14.5) 46 (24.2)
 Posttraumatic stress disorder 22 (9.4) 29 (15.3)
Open in a new tab

Note. Demographic data were missing at baseline for 2 participants. Sample sizes vary for demographic items at the 48-month follow-up because of an additional response option (“I don’t want to answer this question”). Individual participants were followed for 48 months. Accounting for time for enrollment, data from the sample were collected from 2007-2013.

Psychometric Analyses

Results from the psychometric analyses conducted on the victimization items are available as Appendix B (available as a supplement to the online version of this article at http://www.ajph.org). On the basis of frequencies (Table A, available as a supplement to the online version of this article at http://www.ajph.org), reliabilities, and correlations, item 7 was removed from the measure. Factor analyses supported a unidimensional victimization measure.

The IRT analysis indicated that the scale score was more reliable for individuals who experienced moderate to high victimization (Figure A, available as a supplement to the online version of this article at http://www.ajph.org), which was not surprising considering that the purpose of the measure is to assess victimization rather than microagressions.

Latent Class Growth Analyses

Victimization trajectories.

Results from the LCGA are available in Appendix B. We used model fit parameters (Table B, available as a supplement to the online version of this article at http://www.ajph.org), theoretical justification, and class interpretability to arrive at a 4-class solution with linear slopes.

Figure 1 presents the victimization trajectories for the 4 latent classes. Class 1 (low, decreasing victimization; 65.4% of the sample) included youths who reported moderate initial levels of victimization (i.e., intercept) and had a significantly declining victimization trajectory (slope; b = −0.07; 95% CI = –0.10, –0.04; P < .01). Class 2 (moderate, increasing victimization; 10.3% of the sample) was composed of youths who reported moderate initial levels of victimization and demonstrated a significantly increasing victimization trajectory (b = 0.27; 95% CI = 0.09, 0.44; P < .01). Class 3 (high, steady victimization; 5.1% of the sample) contained youths who reported high initial levels of victimization and demonstrated no significant change in their victimization trajectory over time b = −0.01; 95% CI = –0.14, 0.12; P = .87). Class 4 (high, decreasing victimization; 19.2% of the sample) comprised youths who reported high initial levels of victimization and showed a significantly declining victimization trajectory (b = −0.38; 95% CI = –0.48, –0.29; P < .01).

FIGURE 1—

FIGURE 1—

Open in a new tab

Latent Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender Victimization Trajectories for the 4-Class Latent Class Growth Analyses Model: Chicago, IL

Latent class characteristics.

We examined differences in key demographic variables (race/ethnicity, age, birth sex) across the latent classes of victimization trajectories. Because of sample size limitations, we made racial/ethnicity comparisons between participants who identified as Black (54.7%) and the remainder of the sample. Differences by race and age were not significant. We found that the latent classes differed by birth sex, (χ2(3, n = 234) = 11.57; P < .01). There were a higher proportion of females (vs males) in class 1 (low, declining) and lower proportions in the remaining classes.

Mental Health Outcomes

We conducted logistic regressions to analyze differences in MDD and PTSD diagnoses across the 4 victimization trajectory groups, with the low victimization group (low intercept, declining slope) serving as the referent group (Tables 2 and 3). We included birth sex, age, and baseline diagnoses in each model. We also examined the impact of race but did not find it to be a significant covariate; because results did not change with the inclusion of the variable, we removed race from the final model. The latent victimization classes proved to be a significant predictor of MDD and PTSD even when including previous, corresponding diagnoses from baseline.

TABLE 2—

Predictors of Major Depressive Disorder (MDD) Diagnoses at 48-Month Follow-Up: Chicago, IL, 2007–2013

Predictor MDD– (n = 144), Mean ±SD or No (%) MDD+ (n = 46), Mean ±SD or No (%) OR (95% CI)
Age at baseline 18.7 ±1.3 18.7 ±1.4 1.02 (0.78, 1.34)
Baseline MDD
 No (–) 126 (76.8) 38 (23.2) 1 (Ref)
 Yes (+) 18 (69.2) 8 (30.8) 1.60 (0.60, 4.26)
Birth sex
 Male 67 (80.7) 16 (19.3) 1 (Ref)
 Female 77 (72.0) 30 (28.0) 2.01 (0.93, 4.30)
Trajectory
 Low, decreasing 98 (81.0) 23 (19.0) 1 (Ref)
 Moderate, increasing 9 (47.4) 10 (52.6) 5.54 (1.94, 15.82)
 High, steady 7 (58.3) 5 (41.7) 4.23 (1.15, 15.48)
 High, decreasing 30 (78.9) 8 (21.1) 1.32 (0.50, 3.45)
Open in a new tab

Note. CI = confidence interval; OR = odds ratio. The sample size was n = 190. Individual participants were followed for 48 months. Accounting for time for enrollment, data from the sample were collected from 2007-2013.

TABLE 3—

Predictors of Posttraumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) Diagnoses at 48-Month Follow-Up: Chicago, IL, 2007–2013

Predictor PTSD– (n = 161), Mean ±SD or No (%) PTSD+ (n = 29), Mean ±SD or No (%) OR (95% CI)
Age at baseline 18.7 ±1.3 18.8 ±1.4 1.19 (0.86, 1.65)
Baseline PTSD
 No (–) 147 (86.0) 24 (14.0) 1 (Ref)
 Yes (+) 14 (73.7) 5 (26.3) 1.73 (0.52, 5.78)
Birth sex
 Male 74 (89.2) 9 (10.8) 1 (Ref)
 Female 87 (81.3) 20 (18.7) 3.25 (1.24, 8.50)
Trajectory
 Low, decreasing 111 (91.7) 10 (8.3) 1 (Ref)
 Moderate, increasing 12 (63.2) 7 (36.8) 9.37 (2.76, 31.88)
 High, steady 8 (66.7) 4 (33.3) 8.66 (1.93, 39.00)
 High, decreasing 30 (78.9) 8 (21.1) 4.19 (1.39, 12.63)
Open in a new tab

Note. CI = confidence interval; PTSD = posttraumatic stress disorder; OR = odds ratio. The sample size was n = 190. Individual participants were followed for 48 months. Accounting for time for enrollment, data from the sample were collected from 2007-2013.

LGBT youths in class 2 (moderate, increasing; OR = 5.54; 95% CI = 1.94, 15.82; P < .001) and class 3 (high, steady victimization; OR = 4.23; 95% CI = 1.15, 15.48; P < .05) were at higher risk for a depression diagnosis at the 48-month follow-up than were youths in the normative, low victimization group. Similarly, we found youths in class 2 (moderate, increasing; OR = 9.37; 95% CI = 2.76, 31.88; P < .001) and class 3 (high, steady victimization; OR = 8.66; 95% CI = 1.93, 39.00; P < .01) to be at higher risk for a PTSD diagnosis than were youths in the normative, low victimization group. Unlike for MDD, youths in class 4 also were at elevated risk for PTSD (high, decreasing victimization; OR = 4.19; 95% CI = 1.39, 12.63; P < .01).

DISCUSSION

Mental health disparities in minority groups have been associated with the accumulation and proliferation of stress across the lifetime, particularly in research with racial/ethnic minorities and individuals with lower socioeconomic status.33,34 Although research on the accumulation of sexual orientation–based victimization in the lives of LGBT individuals has thus far been lacking, cross-sectional data have shown that LGBT individuals experience greater discrimination, harassment, and victimization than do heterosexuals and cisgender individuals.14,16,51 In response to these minority stressors, LGBT individuals experience more mental health problems than do heterosexual and cisgender individuals.11,12,20–24,51 We examined how different patterns of accumulated victimization during the developmental transition from adolescence to emerging adulthood predicted such psychiatric outcomes.

For most youths in this study (84.6%), experiences of victimization decreased from baseline to the 4-year follow-up. Youths at baseline were mostly in high school, and transitioning out of high school may have resulted in less exposure to peer victimization because, as adults, participants had more agency in choosing settings and peers to affiliate with. As this sample aged, they also were likely better able to access LGBT-affirmative resources. Although comparisons to other studies on victimization trajectories for LGBT samples are not available, 2 longitudinal studies have shown declines on average across development.52,53 Trajectory analyses with heterosexuals have shown that the majority either had low levels of victimization longitudinally or moderate levels that decreased over time, with few participants experiencing high or increasing rates of victimization.38 In our sample of LGBT youths, 10.3% experienced significant increases in victimization, and 5.1% maintained high levels across development. In addition, our sample revealed similar rates of victimization at baseline to other LGBT-specific cross-sectional studies that have used a similar scale.20,54

After controlling for baseline diagnoses, age, and sex, class membership was a significant predictor of MDD and PTSD diagnoses. The control for baseline diagnoses was important because it allowed us to make stronger inferences about the effects of cumulative victimization across the period of our longitudinal study. Youths who experienced moderate levels of victimization that increased or who consistently experienced high levels of victimization were at greater risk for MDD and PTSD than were youths who experienced low levels of victimization. Furthermore, youths who had high initial levels of victimization that declined over time were still at elevated risk for PTSD. These findings corroborate previous research with the minority stress model, showing that victimization places LGBT youths at risk for mental illness.20–24,51 In addition, our results highlight that it is not only isolated experiences of victimization that affect mental health (which has been the focus of much previous research) but instead the accumulation of these stressors that exacerbates mental health problems.

Youths who had high levels of victimization that decreased over time did not differ from youths who had low levels of victimization in regard to depression, but they were significantly more likely to meet criteria for PTSD. This could be because of the lasting effects of traumatic events on PTSD compared with depression. Research with nationally representative population samples has demonstrated that PTSD can be long lasting, and whereas most people (92%) will remit in their lifetime, the median number of years until remission was 14.55 In addition, enduring traumatic events in childhood and interpersonal violence significantly prolonged the time to remission,55 both of which could have lengthened the time our participants met criteria for PTSD even though their levels of victimization were decreasing. Comparatively, a meta-analysis of studies on untreated depression showed that 53% of cases remitted within 12 months, with children and adolescents being more likely to remit than were adults.56 It is possible that youths who met depression criteria earlier in life recovered faster from depression than from PTSD.

Strengths and Limitations

Our study had several strengths, including 7 waves of data collection over the course of 48 months, making this the longest published longitudinal study specifically targeting an LGBT youth sample. Although there have been other longitudinal studies with population-based samples that included LGBT participants, they often did not measure sexual orientation–specific minority stressors as we did in this study. Although LGBT-specific studies, such as ours, are not derived from probability samples, we were able to more specifically measure the types of victimization participants experienced. Also, this was one of the first studies to examine the cumulative impact of LGBT victimization using LCGA to classify individuals into victimization trajectory groups. In addition, we used structured clinical interviews to evaluate participants for Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 4th ed.57 diagnoses instead of relying on self-report measures, which can have low positive predictive value in LGBT youth samples.7 Also, our use of IRT analyses with the victimization measure improved on the more typical use of Likert-type scales or frequencies because it took into account the “difficulty,” or severity, of the victimization.

Limitations of the study included that this was a nonprobability sample recruited from a geographically limited area, which limits our ability to generalize to the national population of LGBT youths. In addition, multiple forms of victimization may exacerbate psychological distress, such as trauma symptoms40; however, we did not measure other forms of victimization (e.g., racially motivated victimization). We also did not measure other childhood adverse events, such as child abuse, which are known to influence later mental health.58 Finally, 95% CIs from some effects were large because of the sample size and variable frequencies; therefore, replication of these effects in larger samples would be advantageous.

Conclusions

Overall, future research on trajectories of victimization may benefit from measuring how the accumulation of multiple forms of victimization and negative childhood events may influence mental health, as well as how LGBT youths may be resilient in the face of cumulative stressors. Although the lives of LGBT youths are heavily influenced by heterosexism and marginalization,59 youths vary in the degree to which these experiences accumulate across their lifetimes. As our results show, those trajectories of victimization have significant implications for mental health. Through identifying these trajectories, as well as the determinants and outcomes of these lived experiences, researchers can identify key factors in the paths to positive development and ways to decrease the elevated mental health problems experienced by LGBT people.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

This research was supported by the National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH; grant R21MH095413), the American Foundation for Suicide Prevention (AFSP), the William T. Grant Foundation, and the David Bohnett Foundation.

We are grateful to Antonia Clifford and Lou Bigelow for their assistance with the development of study materials, participant recruitment, and data collection. We would also like to thank our participants, who generously gave us their time and shared their experiences with us.

Note. The content of this article is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily reflect the views of the NIMH, the AFSP, the William T. Grant Foundation, or the David Bohnett Foundation.

HUMAN PARTICIPANT PROTECTION

The Northwestern University institutional review board approved this study. We obtained a waiver of parental permission for minor participants under US45CFR46.408(c) and a federal certificate of confidentiality. Participants provided written informed consent.

REFERENCES

  • 1.McLaughlin KA, Hatzenbuehler ML, Xuan Z, Conron KJ. Disproportionate exposure to early-life adversity and sexual orientation disparities in psychiatric morbidity. Child Abuse Negl. 2012;36(9):645–655. doi: 10.1016/j.chiabu.2012.07.004. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.King M, Semlyen J, Tai SS et al. A systematic review of mental disorder, suicide, and deliberate self harm in lesbian, gay and bisexual people. BMC Psychiatry. 2008;8:70. doi: 10.1186/1471-244X-8-70. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Roberts AL, Austin SB, Corliss HL, Vandermorris AK, Koenen KC. Pervasive trauma exposure among US sexual orientation minority adults and risk of posttraumatic stress disorder. Am J Public Health. 2010;100(12):2433–2441. doi: 10.2105/AJPH.2009.168971. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Lick DJ, Durso LE, Johnson KL. Minority stress and physical health among sexual minorities. Perspect Psychol Sci. 2013;8(5):521–548. doi: 10.1177/1745691613497965. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Marshal MP, Dietz LJ, Friedman MS et al. Suicidality and depression disparities between sexual minority and heterosexual youth: a meta-analytic review. J Adolesc Health. 2011;49(2):115–123. doi: 10.1016/j.jadohealth.2011.02.005. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Bostwick WB, Meyer I, Aranda F et al. Mental health and suicidality among racially/ethnically diverse sexual minority youths. Am J Public Health. 2014;104(6):1129–1136. doi: 10.2105/AJPH.2013.301749. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Mustanski BS, Garofalo R, Emerson EM. Mental health disorders, psychological distress, and suicidality in a diverse sample of lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender youths. Am J Public Health. 2010;100(12):2426–2432. doi: 10.2105/AJPH.2009.178319. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Burns MN, Ryan DT, Garofalo R, Newcomb ME, Mustanski B. Mental health disorders in young urban sexual minority men. J Adolesc Health. 2015;56(1):52–58. doi: 10.1016/j.jadohealth.2014.07.018. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Rice E, Barman-Adhikari A, Rhoades H et al. Homelessness experiences, sexual orientation, and sexual risk taking among high school students in Los Angeles. J Adolesc Health. 2013;52(6):773–778. doi: 10.1016/j.jadohealth.2012.11.011. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Roberts AL, Rosario M, Slopen N, Calzo JP, Austin SB. Childhood gender nonconformity, bullying victimization, and depressive symptoms across adolescence and early adulthood: an 11-year longitudinal study. J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry. 2013;52(2):143–152. doi: 10.1016/j.jaac.2012.11.006. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Meyer IH. Minority stress and mental health in gay men. J Health Soc Behav. 1995;36(1):38–56. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Meyer IH. Prejudice, social stress, and mental health in lesbian, gay, and bisexual populations: conceptual issues and research evidence. Psychol Bull. 2003;129(5):674–697. doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.129.5.674. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Hendricks ML, Testa RJ. A conceptual framework for clinical work with transgender and gender nonconforming clients: an adaptation of the minority stress model. Prof Psychol Res Pr. 2012;43(5):460–467. [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Berlan ED, Corliss HL, Field AE, Goodman E, Austin SB. Sexual orientation and bullying among adolescents in the Growing Up Today Study. J Adolesc Health. 2010;46(4):366–371. doi: 10.1016/j.jadohealth.2009.10.015. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Williams T, Connolly J, Pepler D, Craig W. Peer victimization, social support, and psychosocial adjustment of sexual minority adolescents. J Youth Adolesc. 2005;34(5):471–482. [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Austin SB, Roberts AL, Corliss HL, Molnar BE. Sexual violence victimization history and sexual risk indicators in a community-based urban cohort of “mostly heterosexual” and heterosexual young women. Am J Public Health. 2008;98(6):1015–1020. doi: 10.2105/AJPH.2006.099473. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Russell ST, Everett BG, Rosario M, Birkett M. Indicators of victimization and sexual orientation among adolescents: analyses from Youth Risk Behavior Surveys. Am J Public Health. 2014;104(2):255–261. doi: 10.2105/AJPH.2013.301493. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 18.Almeida J, Johnson RM, Corliss HL, Molnar BE, Azrael D. Emotional distress among LGBT youth: the influence of perceived discrimination based on sexual orientation. J Youth Adolesc. 2009;38(7):1001–1014. doi: 10.1007/s10964-009-9397-9. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Reisner SL, Greytak EA, Parsons JT, Ybarra ML. Gender minority social stress in adolescence: disparities in adolescent bullying and substance use by gender identity. J Sex Res. 2015;52(3):243–256. doi: 10.1080/00224499.2014.886321. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20.Mustanski B, Newcomb M, Garofalo R. Mental health of lesbian, gay, and bisexual youth: a developmental resiliency perspective. J Gay Lesbian Soc Serv. 2011;23(2):204–225. doi: 10.1080/10538720.2011.561474. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 21.Toomey RB, Ryan C, Diaz RM, Card NA, Russell ST. Gender-nonconforming lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender youth: school victimization and young adult psychosocial adjustment. Dev Psychol. 2010;46(6):1580–1589. doi: 10.1037/a0020705. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 22.Newcomb ME, Heinz AJ, Mustanski B. Examining risk and protective factors for alcohol use in lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender youth: a longitudinal multilevel analysis. J Stud Alcohol Drugs. 2012;73(5):783–793. doi: 10.15288/jsad.2012.73.783. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 23.Mustanski B, Liu RT. A longitudinal study of predictors of suicide attempts among lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender youth. Arch Sex Behav. 2013;42(3):437–448. doi: 10.1007/s10508-012-0013-9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 24.Hatzenbuehler ML. The social environment and suicide attempts in lesbian, gay, and bisexual youth. Pediatrics. 2011;127(5):896–903. doi: 10.1542/peds.2010-3020. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 25.Bandermann KM, Szymanski DM. Exploring coping mediators between heterosexist oppression and posttraumatic stress symptoms among lesbian, gay, and bisexual persons. Psychol Sex Orientat Gend Divers. 2014;1(3):213–224. [Google Scholar]
  • 26.Huebner DM, Rebchook GM, Kegeles SM. Experiences of harassment, discrimination, and physical violence among young gay and bisexual men. Am J Public Health. 2004;94(7):1200–1203. doi: 10.2105/ajph.94.7.1200. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 27.Morris JF, Balsam KF. Lesbian and bisexual women’s experiences of victimization: mental health, revictimization, and sexual identity development. J Lesbian Stud. 2003;7(4):67–85. doi: 10.1300/J155v07n04_05. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 28.Herek GM. Hate crimes and stigma-related experiences among sexual minority adults in the United States: prevalence estimates from a national probability sample. J Interpers Violence. 2009;24(1):54–74. doi: 10.1177/0886260508316477. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 29.Nuttbrock L, Bockting W, Rosenblum A et al. Gender abuse, depressive symptoms, and HIV and other sexually transmitted infections among male-to-female transgender persons: a three-year prospective study. Am J Public Health. 2013;103(2):300–307. doi: 10.2105/AJPH.2011.300568. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 30.Grant JM, Mottet LA, Tanis J, Harrison J, Herman JL, Keisling M. Injustice at Every Turn: A Report of the National Transgender Discrimination Survey. Washington, DC: National Center for Transgender Equality and National Gay and Lesbian Task Force; 2011. [Google Scholar]
  • 31.McLaughlin KA, Hatzenbuehler ML, Xuan Z, Conron KL. Disproportionate exposure to early-life adversity and sexual orientation disparities in psychiatric morbidity. Child Abuse Negl. 2012;36(9):645–655. doi: 10.1016/j.chiabu.2012.07.004. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 32.Hatzenbuehler ML, Slopen N, McLaughlin KA. Stressful life events, sexual orientation, and cardiometabolic risk among young adults in the United States. Health Psychol. 2014;33(10):1185–1194. doi: 10.1037/hea0000126. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 33.Pearlin LI, Schieman S, Fazio EM, Meersman SC. Stress, health, and the life course: some conceptual perspectives. J Health Soc Behav. 2005;46(2):205–219. doi: 10.1177/002214650504600206. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 34.Nurius PS, Uehara E, Zatzick DF. Intersection of stress, social disadvantage, and life course processes: reframing trauma and mental health. Am J Psychiatr Rehabil. 2013;16(2):91–114. doi: 10.1080/15487768.2013.789688. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 35.Geronimus AT, Hicken M, Keene D, Bound J. “Weathering” and age patterns of allostatic load scores among Blacks and Whites in the United States. Am J Public Health. 2006;96(5):826–833. doi: 10.2105/AJPH.2004.060749. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 36.Suglia SF, Staudenmayer J, Cohen S, Enlow MB, Rich-Edwards JW, Wright RJ. Cumulative stress and cortisol disruption among Black and Hispanic pregnant women in an urban cohort. Psychol Trauma. 2010;2(4):326–334. doi: 10.1037/a0018953. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 37.Skinner ML, Shirtcliff EA, Haggerty KP, Coe CL, Catalano RF. Allostasis model facilitates understanding race differences in the diurnal cortisol rhythm. Dev Psychopathol. 2011;23(4):1167–1186. doi: 10.1017/S095457941100054X. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 38.Sullivan CJ, Wilcox P, Ousey GC. Trajectories of victimization from early to mid-adolescence. Crim Justice Behav. 2011;38(1):85–104. [Google Scholar]
  • 39.Turner HA, Finkelhor D, Ormrod R. The effect of lifetime victimization on the mental health of children and adolescents. Soc Sci Med. 2006;62(1):13–27. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2005.05.030. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 40.Reid JA, Sullivan CJ. A latent class typology of juvenile victims and exploration of risk factors and outcomes of victimization. Crim Justice Behav. 2009;36(10):1001–1024. [Google Scholar]
  • 41.Liu RT, Mustanski B. Suicidal ideation and self-harm in lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender youth. Am J Prev Med. 2012;42(3):221–228. doi: 10.1016/j.amepre.2011.10.023. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 42.Newcomb ME, Heinz AJ, Birkett M, Mustanski B. A longitudinal examination of risk and protective factors for cigarette smoking among lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender youth. J Adolesc Health. 2014;54(5):558–564. doi: 10.1016/j.jadohealth.2013.10.208. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 43.Mustanski B. Ethical and Regulatory Issues With Conducting Sexuality Research With LGBT Youth. San Juan, Puerto Rico: International Academy of Sex Researchers; 2009. [Google Scholar]
  • 44.D’Augelli AR, Grossman AH, Starks MT. Childhood gender atypicality, victimization, and PTSD among lesbian, gay, and bisexual youth. J Interpers Violence. 2006;21(11):1462–1482. doi: 10.1177/0886260506293482. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 45.Chesir-Teran D, Hughes D. Heterosexism in high school and victimization among lesbian, gay, bisexual, and questioning students. J Youth Adolesc. 2009;38(7):963–975. doi: 10.1007/s10964-008-9364-x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 46.Pilkington NW, Daugelli AR. Victimization of lesbian, gay, and bisexual youth in community settings. J Community Psychol. 1995;23(1):34–56. [Google Scholar]
  • 47.Neal DJ, Corbin WR, Fromme K. Measurement of alcohol-related consequences among high school and college students: application of item response models to the Rutgers Alcohol Problem Index. Psychol Assess. 2006;18(4):402–414. doi: 10.1037/1040-3590.18.4.402. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 48.Shaffer D, Fisher P, Lucas CP, Dulcan MK, Schwab-Stone ME. NIMH Diagnostic Interview Schedule for Children Version IV (NIMH DISC-IV): description, differences from previous versions, and reliability of some common diagnoses. J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry. 2000;39(1):28–38. doi: 10.1097/00004583-200001000-00014. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 49.Robins L, Cottler L, Bucholz K, Compton W, North CS, Rourke KM. Diagnostic Interview Schedule for DSM-IV. St. Louis, MO: Washington University School of Medicine, Department of Psychiatry; 2002. [Google Scholar]
  • 50.Shaffer D, Fisher PW, Lucas CP. The Diagnostic Interview Schedule for Children (DISC) In: Henson M, editor. Comprehensive Handbook of Psychological Assessment. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons; 2004. pp. 256–270. [Google Scholar]
  • 51.Burton CM, Marshal MP, Chisolm DJ, Sucato GS, Friedman MS. Sexual minority–related victimization as a mediator of mental health disparities in sexual minority youth: a longitudinal analysis. J Youth Adolesc. 2013;42(3):394–402. doi: 10.1007/s10964-012-9901-5. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 52.Birkett M, Newcomb ME, Mustanski B. Does it get better? A longitudinal analysis of psychological distress and victimization in lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and questioning youth. J Adolesc Health. 2015;56(3):280–285. doi: 10.1016/j.jadohealth.2014.10.275. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 53.Robinson JP, Espelage DL, Rivers I. Developmental trends in peer victimization and emotional distress in LGB and heterosexual youth. Pediatrics. 2013;131(3):423–430. doi: 10.1542/peds.2012-2595. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 54.D’Augelli AR, Pilkington NW, Hershberger SL. Incidence and mental health impact of sexual orientation victimization of lesbian, gay, and bisexual youths in high school. Sch Psychol Q. 2002;17(2):148–167. [Google Scholar]
  • 55.Chapman C, Mills K, Slade T et al. Remission from post-traumatic stress disorder in the general population. Psychol Med. 2012;42(8):1695–1703. doi: 10.1017/S0033291711002856. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 56.Whiteford HA, Harris MG, McKeon G et al. Estimating remission from untreated major depression: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Psychol Med. 2013;43(8):1569–1585. doi: 10.1017/S0033291712001717. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 57.Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders. 4th ed. Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Association; 1994. [Google Scholar]
  • 58.Felitti VJ, Anda RF, Nordenberg D et al. Relationship of childhood abuse and household dysfunction to many of the leading causes of death in adults. The Adverse Childhood Experiences (ACE) study. Am J Prev Med. 1998;14(4):245–258. doi: 10.1016/s0749-3797(98)00017-8. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 59.Mustanski B, Birkett M, Greene GJ, Hatzenbuehler ML, Newcomb ME. Envisioning an America without sexual orientation inequities in adolescent health. Am J Public Health. 2014;104(2):218–225. doi: 10.2105/AJPH.2013.301625. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from American Journal of Public Health are provided here courtesy of American Public Health Association

RESOURCES