The ICF and Male-to-Female Transsexual Communication
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT The purpose of this article is to describe the assessment and treatment of communication in male-to-female transsexual individuals, within the context of the World Health Organization's International Classification of Functioning Disability and Health (ICF) framework. Structural and functional impairments, activity limitations, and participation restrictions specific to male-to-female transsexual communication are discussed, as well as environmental and personal factors that facilitate or prevent communicative success. Further, assessment and treatment of communication in transsexual individuals is described within the ICF framework, and the merits and unique considerations of using the ICF with this population is described. KEYWORDS: Transsexualtransgendergender dysphoriaInternational Classification of Functioning Disability and Health (IFC)communication ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Thank you to Joanne Volden, PhD, and Johanna Darrah, PhD, at the University of Alberta for their helpful comments on previous versions of this manuscript.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it