Documenting research with transgender and gender diverse people: protocol for an evidence map and thematic analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: There is limited information about how transgender, gender diverse, and Two-Spirit (trans) people have been represented and studied by researchers. The objectives of this study are to (1) map and describe trans research in the social sciences, sciences, humanities, health, education, and business, (2) identify evidence gaps and opportunities for more responsible research with trans people, (3) assess the use of text mining for study identification, and (4) increase access to trans research for key stakeholders through the creation of a web-based evidence map. METHODS: Study design was informed by community consultations and pilot searches. Eligibility criteria were established to include all original research of any design, including trans people or their health information, and published in English in peer-reviewed journals. A complex electronic search strategy based on relevant concepts in 15 databases was developed to obtain a broad range of results linked to transgender, gender diverse, and Two-Spirit individuals and communities. Searches conducted in early 2015 resulted in 25,242 references after removal of duplicates. Based on the number of references, resources, and an objective to capture upwards of 90% of the existing literature, this study is a good candidate for text mining using Latent Dirichlet Allocation to improve efficiency of the screening process. The following information will be collected for evidence mapping: study topic, study design, methods and data sources, recruitment strategies, sample size, sample demographics, researcher name and affiliation, country where research was conducted, funding source, and year of publication. DISCUSSION: The proposed research incorporates an extensive search strategy, text mining, and evidence map; it therefore has the potential to build on knowledge in several fields. Review results will increase awareness of existing trans research, identify evidence gaps, and inform strategic research prioritization. Publishing the map online will improve access to research for key stakeholders including community members, policy makers, and healthcare providers. This study will also contribute to knowledge in the area of text mining for study identification by providing an example of how semi-automation performs for screening on title and abstract and on full text.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.140 | 0.157 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.011 | 0.012 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.009 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.070 | 0.019 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".