MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2329527526 · doi:10.15766/mep_2374-8265.10068

Medical Queeries: Transgender Healthcare

2015· article· en· W2329527526 on OpenAlexaffabout
Tehmina Ahmad, Han Yan, Keegan Guidolin, Paul Foster

Bibliographic record

VenueMedEdPORTAL · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicPatient-Provider Communication in Healthcare
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTransgenderHealth careMedicinePopulationAlternative medicineFamily medicineMedical educationNursingSociologyPolitical scienceGender studies

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Transgender individuals, particularly those who are undergoing or have undergone sex reassignment therapies or surgeries, constitute an under-serviced population when it comes to access to healthcare. This is the result of a variety of reasons. However, physician behavior and negative experiences within the health care system are both commonly cited reasons why transgender individuals fail to seek appropriate medical attention. The goal of this resource is to inform physicians and other health care providers of some of the major issues and barriers that transgender people face when seeking medical care. It also proposes several potential solutions to these problems. “Medical Queeries: Presenting Transcare Initiatives,” is an empowering educational film that provides health care workers with an opportunity to better understand and reflect upon the needs of the transgender community. The film features a transgender individual who focuses on the approaches health care providers (particularly physicians and nurses) can consider in order to improve transcare management. After viewing this video, the audience should be able to define transgender, transcare, and develop self-awareness of how to combat transgender barriers to health care. The accompanying PowerPoint presentation serves as a discussion tool to further enhance student learning. This learning module requires only a projector and screen, and a facilitator. The session can be run in 45-60 minutes, including time allotted for discussion. The length of the presentation means that it can be done over a lunch hour or fitted into a regular meeting. Discussion is key—having someone to help facilitate conversation will make the session engaging, interesting, and informative. The video has been distributed through the Association of Faculties of Medicine of Canada, and through various transgender healthcare presentations in health care settings such as the London Health Sciences Centre. It is also found on the Canadian Healthcare Education Commons.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.078
Threshold uncertainty score0.261

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0080.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0030.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0780.007

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.

Opus teacher head0.424
GPT teacher head0.484
Teacher spread0.060 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedEdPORTALSame topicPatient-Provider Communication in HealthcareFrench-language works237,207