MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2905503757 · doi:10.1089/trgh.2018.0017

Chest Binding and Care Seeking Among Transmasculine Adults: A Cross-Sectional Study

2018· article· en· W2905503757 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueTransgender Health · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicLGBTQ Health, Identity, and Policy
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineFeelingOdds ratioCross-sectional studyConfidence intervalLogistic regressionTransgenderHealth careChest painDescriptive statisticsFamily medicineOddsInternal medicinePsychologyPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose: Chest binding, or compressing the chest tissue, is a common practice among transmasculine individuals that can promote mental health, but frequently results in negative physical health symptoms. The purpose of this study was to assess the prevalence and correlates of care seeking for binding-related health concerns among transmasculine adults. Methods: Descriptive statistics were calculated and logistic regression models were run using data from the Binding Health Project, a cross-sectional online survey among transgender adults who had practiced chest binding (n=1800). The analysis was restricted to transmasculine individuals who had consistent access to health care and were female assigned at birth or intersex (n=1273). Results: Of 1273 participants, 88.9% had experienced at least one binding-related symptom and 82.3% believed that it was important to discuss chest binding with their health care provider, while 14.8% had sought care related to binding. Participants reporting pain, musculoskeletal, or neurological symptoms had 3.19, 1.85, and 1.72 times the adjusted odds, respectively, of seeking care compared to those who did not report those symptoms (95% confidence intervals [CIs]: 1.38–7.37; 1.12–3.06; 1.10–2.68). Care seeking was associated with feeling safe and comfortable initiating a conversation about binding with one's provider (adjusted odds ratio [AOR]=2.07, 95% CI 1.32–3.24). Care seeking was not significantly associated with feeling comfortable receiving a chest examination (AOR=1.07, 95% CI 0.71–1.62). Conclusion: Low rates of care seeking for binding-related symptoms may be driven by lack of access to a provider with whom patients feel safe and comfortable, rather than by general discomfort with chest examinations. While transmasculine patients may be most likely to present with musculoskeletal, neurological, or pain-related concerns, providers should also assess for other symptoms. Providers should be familiar with the benefits and potential complications of binding and initiate non-stigmatizing positive discussions about binding with their transmasculine patients.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.097
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.073
GPT teacher head0.415
Teacher spread0.342 · 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