Towards Providing Culturally Aware Nutritional Care for Transgender People: Key Issues and Considerations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Transgender people are an important group for whom access to healthcare is often problematic. Dietitians need to be aware of key issues in transgender health to provide culturally competent clinical nutritional care. This article serves as a primer, clarifying key terms and concepts, exploring the impact of stigma and discrimination on health and nutrition for people from transgender communities, and offering practical advice for nutritional and other related issues. Education for dietitians both pre- and postqualification is an important part of improving care and building skills and awareness of cultural humility. Transgender people may be at increased nutritional risk due to increased risk of cardiovascular disease, HIV, body image issues, and food insecurity. This risk profile, along with the history of trauma both outside and related to the medical community means that there is an urgent need for dietitians to develop practice tools for assessment, care, and referral to improve the nutritional status and well-being of this client group.
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 | 0.020 | 0.023 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.009 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.012 |
| Research integrity | 0.009 | 0.016 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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".