MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2897415800 · doi:10.1089/lgbt.2018.0103

The Relationship Between Tobacco Use and Legal Document Gender-Marker Change, Hormone Use, and Gender-Affirming Surgery in a United States Sample of Trans-Feminine and Trans-Masculine Individuals: Implications for Cardiovascular Health

2018· article· en· W2897415800 on OpenAlexaff
Jeremy D. Kidd, Curtis Dolezal, Walter Bockting

Bibliographic record

VenueLGBT Health · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicLGBTQ Health, Identity, and Policy
Canadian institutionsColumbia College
FundersEunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human DevelopmentNational Institute on Drug AbuseNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsTransgenderMedicineDemographyLogistic regressionOddsOdds ratioPopulationMale genderPsychological interventionGerontologyPsychologyInternal medicineEnvironmental healthPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: Transgender individuals smoke tobacco at disproportionately higher rates than the general U.S. population, and concurrent use of gender-affirming hormones (estrogen or testosterone) and tobacco confers greater cardiovascular (CV) risk. This study examines the relationship between tobacco use and legal document gender-marker change, and medical/surgical interventions for gender transition. METHODS: Data came from an Internet-based survey of U.S. trans-feminine (n = 631) and trans-masculine (n = 473) individuals. We used multivariable logistic regression to investigate the relationship between past 3-month tobacco use and legal document gender-marker change, hormone use, and gender-affirming surgery controlling for demographic covariates and enacted and felt stigma. RESULTS: Compared to trans-feminine participants, trans-masculine individuals reported significantly higher rates of lifetime (74.4% vs. 63.5%) and past 3-month tobacco use (47.8% vs. 36.1%), and began smoking at an earlier age (14.5 vs. 15.5 years). Trans-feminine smokers reported significantly more frequent and heavier use. Adjusting for demographic covariates and enacted and felt stigma, legal document gender-marker change was associated with lower tobacco-use odds among trans-feminine individuals, whereas gender-affirming surgery predicted lower smoking odds among trans-masculine individuals. There were no significant differences in tobacco use by hormone use status. CONCLUSION: In this study, trans-masculine individuals were more likely to smoke and trans-feminine individuals reported heavier use. It is concerning that individuals receiving hormones did not report lower smoking rates, given the elevated CV risk of this combination. This is a missed opportunity to intervene on a major public health issue and highlights the need for smoking cessation interventions in this population.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.290
GPT teacher head0.414
Teacher spread0.124 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations67
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLGBT HealthSame topicLGBTQ Health, Identity, and PolicyFrench-language works237,207