# Measurement instruments for sexual identity minority stress in adults: A scoping review

## TL;DR

This review maps tools used to measure stress related to sexual identity among LGBQ adults and highlights gaps in inclusivity and consistency.

## Contribution

The study systematically identifies and analyzes 105 measurement instruments for sexual minority stress, revealing inconsistencies and underrepresentation in current tools.

## Key findings

- A total of 105 instruments were identified, mostly focusing on internalized homonegativity and stigmatization.
- The review found a lack of instruments for lesbian, bisexual, and non-monosexual populations.
- Inconsistent naming and definitions across instruments pose a risk of jingle-jangle fallacy.

## Abstract

Lesbian, gay, bisexual, and queer (LGBQ) populations face disproportionate health inequities shaped by minority stress processes. To enable consistent and comparable assessment, this scoping review maps measurement instruments for sexual-identity minority stress. Following PRISMA guidelines, the review involved an extensive literature search across Medline, Embase, PsycInfo, PSYNDEXplus, PTSDpub, Web of Science, the GASP Measures Database and GESIS Open Access Repository for Measurement Instruments (last updated in February 2025), resulting in 39,642 references. Selection criteria focused on instruments measuring minority stress in form of stigmatization, discrimination, victimization, internalized homophobia, expectations of rejection, identity concealment, as well as positive aspects of minority identity among adult LGBQ populations. Gender-identity-related stressors were outside the scope. Only articles in English and German were considered. No restrictions were applied with regard to year of publication or publication medium. A total of 105 instruments with 152 references met the criteria and were included for detailed analysis. The analysis identified a broad spectrum of instruments, predominantly targeting internalized homonegativity and stigmatization. The review also uncovered the risk of jingle-jangle fallacy, attributable to inconsistent naming and definition of constructs across instruments. An underrepresentation of instruments for lesbian, bisexual and non-monosexual populations, and a trend towards instruments emerging from grey literature sources was observed. This scoping review demonstrates a rich diversity in instruments measuring sexual minority stress but reveals gaps in gender inclusivity. The findings emphasize the importance of expanding the scope to include intersectionality and diverse cultural contexts. PROSPERO registration number: CRD42021257995.