MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2985557605 · doi:10.1002/jgc4.1187

Trans‐inclusive genetic counseling services: Recommendations from members of the transgender and non‐binary community

2019· article· en· W2985557605 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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Genetic Counseling · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicLGBTQ Health, Identity, and Policy
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersUniversity of British ColumbiaCanada Research Chairs
KeywordsTransgenderGenetic counselingCLARITYPsychologyQualitative researchIdentity (music)Gender identityMedicineDevelopmental psychologyClinical psychologySocial psychologySociologyGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The term transgender is used to describe individuals whose gender identity does not align with their sex assigned at birth. The term transgender can include individuals who identify as men, as women, as both of the traditional concepts of masculine and feminine gender, or neither masculine or feminine. The latter two gender identities may also be known as non-binary or gender non-conforming identities. Transgender individuals may attend genetic counseling for a variety of reasons, but current pedigree nomenclature does not adequately represent both sex assigned at birth (which is important for determining risk for certain conditions) and gender (which is important for providing trans-inclusive care). We conducted an interpretive description (qualitative, interview based) study with individuals from the transgender community to gather insight on pedigree nomenclature and more broadly, how to provide safe and effective genetic counseling for transgender individuals. We conducted semi-structured telephone interviews with individuals who identified as transgender or gender non-binary, transcribed them verbatim, and checked them for accuracy before coding and inductively identifying themes. Among our eight participants, five identified as trans-masculine, two as trans-feminine, five as non-binary/gender non-conforming (some participants had more than one gender identity). From the interviews, we identified a single key, over-arching theme: participants' felt it is the genetic counselor's responsibility to create safety and provide clarity about the clinical importance of both sex assigned at birth and gender identity for trans patients. Two specific strategies that counselors could use to achieve this safety and clarity were discussed extensively: (a) validating gender identity and (b) using inclusive and well-defined pedigree symbols that denote both sex assigned at birth and gender identity. Our data have important practice implications in terms of the importance of validating gender identity and using respectful pedigree symbols.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.588
Threshold uncertainty score0.929

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 studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.324
Teacher spread0.303 · 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