How can healthcare providers avoid stereotyping while acknowledging anatomical diversity in sexual and reproductive health care?
Executive summary
Healthcare providers can reduce stereotyping by combining inclusive, rights-based care with concrete changes in education, training, data collection and clinical practice—approaches highlighted by WHO, professional groups and recent education research [1] [2] [3]. Anatomy and curricula reformers argue explicitly that showing anatomical variation (including sex, gender, race, disability) in teaching materials and clinical simulations reduces hidden curricula that produce biased assumptions [3] [4].
1. Treat anatomical diversity as clinical reality, not exceptionalism
Anatomy educators and public-health bodies urge that variation in bodies is the baseline fact clinicians encounter; embedding diverse models, case examples and dissection material prevents the “ideal body” framing that shapes future practice [3]. WHO and the World Association for Sexual Health promote people-centred, rights-based sexual health that “covers topics affecting people in all their diversity,” reinforcing that inclusive clinical approaches are the standard, not an add-on [1] [2].
2. Reform training and curricula to replace hidden curricula with explicit instruction
Research in anatomy education finds the hidden curriculum privileges normative bodies and can instill bias; authors call for curricula that intentionally represent disabled people, varied body types and different life stages to broaden clinician expectations [3]. Student-driven studies show learners want inclusion and see anatomy as a place to model diversity and cultural competency—meaning change must start in preclinical education [4].
3. Use simulation and diverse educational resources to expose clinicians to variability
Simulation-based learning and diverse anatomical models are practical tools to build clinical habits that counter stereotyping; simulation helps develop self-awareness and cultural humility, and manufacturers/educators are already adding more female and racially diverse models to teaching platforms [5] [6]. Evidence cited by educators shows that when training mirrors real populations, providers become better at recognizing atypical presentations and avoid one-size-fits-all assumptions [5] [6].
4. Collect and use inclusive data — cautiously and ethically
Policy work recommends collecting sexual orientation and gender identity data to illuminate disparities and guide care, but those efforts have political and funding vulnerabilities [7] [8]. Sources document both the value of SOGI data to reduce disparities and the recent policy shifts that threaten such collection; clinicians must balance clinical utility with confidentiality and advocacy for stable, rights-protecting data practices [7] [8].
5. Center lived experience and community expertise in care design
Organizations and researchers recommend partnering with communities—LGBTQ+, disabled people, BIPOC populations—to co-develop protocols and research so services match real-world needs; Ibis Reproductive Health emphasizes filling data gaps on transgender and gender-diverse people to enable affirming, evidence-based SRH care [9]. World Sexual Health Day materials underscore that gender-affirming care is healthcare and that campaigns should be informed by the lived realities of affected groups [10].
6. Train for cultural humility and explicit anti-stereotype practice, not checkbox “competence”
Multiple education and DEI sources stress that one-off trainings are insufficient: institutions must integrate DEI into longitudinal curricula, assessment and faculty development to change habits—simulation, reflective practice, and diverse mentorship are key mechanisms [5] [11]. The literature shows benefits when learners repeatedly engage with diverse cases and faculty from underrepresented backgrounds [12] [11].
7. Acknowledge system-level constraints and political headwinds
Progress depends on policy and funding: national strategic plans have promoted SOGI data and targeted services [7], while recent executive actions and funding shifts have rolled back nondiscrimination protections and SOGI guidance, threatening clinics’ ability to deliver affirming care [8]. Providers must therefore combine clinical steps with institutional advocacy to sustain inclusive practice.
8. Practical clinical habits that concretely reduce stereotyping
Draw on the education and policy signals above to adopt simple, evidence-informed routines: use anatomically neutral language until relevant (ask about organs, not assumed gender), standardize checklists that trigger individualized screening, document anatomy-relevant findings rather than gender labels, and use diverse visuals and consent scripts—approaches supported by calls to make sexual health people-centred and inclusive [1] [2] [3].
Limitations and unresolved gaps: available sources document education reforms, policy tensions and organizational statements but do not provide a single, unified clinical protocol for every setting—practices must be adapted locally and developed with patient communities [4] [9].