MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2981537672 · doi:10.1093/humupd/dmz026

Fertility preservation for transgender adolescents and young adults: a systematic review

2019· review· en· W2981537672 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

VenueHuman Reproduction Update · 2019
Typereview
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicLGBTQ Health, Identity, and Policy
Canadian institutionsHealth Sciences CentreSunnybrook Health Science CentreWomen's College HospitalMcMaster UniversityCReATe Fertility CentreCanada Research ChairsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTransgenderPsychosocialMEDLINESystematic reviewGender dysphoriaPopulationMedicineFertility preservationPsycINFOFamily medicineDistressFertilityPsychologyClinical psychologyPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Many transgender individuals choose to undergo gender-affirming hormone treatment (GAHT) and/or sex reassignment surgery (SRS) to alleviate the distress that is associated with gender dysphoria. Although these treatment options often succeed in alleviating such symptoms, they can also negatively impact future reproductive potential. OBJECTIVE AND RATIONALE: The purpose of this systematic review was to synthesize the available psychosocial and medical literature on fertility preservation (FP) for transgender adolescents and young adults (TAYAs), to identify gaps in the current research and provide suggestions for future research directions. SEARCH METHODS: A systematic review of English peer-reviewed papers published from 2001 onwards, using the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses protocols (PRISMA-P) guidelines, was conducted. Four journal databases (Ovid MEDLINE, PubMed Medline, Ovid Embase and Ovid PsychINFO) were used to identify all relevant studies exploring psychosocial or medical aspects of FP in TAYAs. The search strategy used a combination of subject headings and generic terms related to the study topic and population. Bibliographies of the selected articles were also hand searched and cross-checked to ensure comprehensive coverage. All selected papers were independently reviewed by the co-authors. Characteristics of the studies, objectives and key findings were extracted, and a systematic review was conducted. OUTCOMES: Included in the study were 19 psychosocial-based research papers and 21 medical-based research papers that explore fertility-related aspects specific for this population. Key psychosocial themes included the desire to have children for TAYAs; FP discussions, counselling and referrals provided by healthcare providers (HCPs); FP utilization; the attitudes, knowledge and beliefs of TAYAs, HCPs and the parents/guardians of TAYAs; and barriers to accessing FP. Key medical themes included fertility-related effects of GAHT, FP options and outcomes. From a synthesis of the literature, we conclude that there are many barriers preventing TAYAs from pursuing FP, including a lack of awareness of FP options, high costs, invasiveness of the available procedures and the potential psychological impact of the FP process. The available medical data on the reproductive effects of GAHT are diverse, and while detrimental effects are anticipated, the extent to which these effects are reversible is unknown. WIDER IMPLICATIONS: FP counselling should begin as early as possible as a standard of care before GAHT to allow time for informed decisions. The current lack of high-quality medical data specific to FP counselling practice for this population means there is a reliance on expert opinion and extrapolation from studies in the cisgender population. Future research should include large-scale cohort studies (preferably multi-centered), longitudinal studies of TAYAs across the FP process, qualitative studies of the parents/guardians of TAYAs and studies evaluating the effectiveness of different strategies to improve the attitudes, knowledge and beliefs of HCPs.

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)0.002
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: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.518
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
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)0.0000.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.150
GPT teacher head0.438
Teacher spread0.288 · 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