MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Health and Health Care Among Transgender Adults in the United States

2021· review· en· W4200066140 on OpenAlexaff
Ayden I. Scheim, Kellan Baker, Arjee Restar, Randall L. Sell

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnual Review of Public Health · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicLGBTQ Health, Identity, and Policy
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTransgenderHealth equityPublic healthSocial determinants of healthHealth careHealth promotionIntersectionalityHealth policyMental healthPsychologyPublic policyPolitical scienceGerontologyPublic relationsEnvironmental healthSociologyMedicineGender studiesNursingPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Transgender (trans) communities in the USA and globally have long organized for health and social equity but have only recently gained increased visibility within public health. In this review, we synthesize evidence demonstrating that trans adults in the USA are affected by disparities in physical and mental health and in access to health care, relative to cisgender (nontrans) persons. We draw on theory and data to situate these disparities in their social contexts, explicating the roles of gender affirmation, multilevel and intersectional stigmas, and public policies in reproducing or ameliorating trans health disparities. Until recently, trans health disparities were largely made invisible by exclusionary data collection practices. We highlight the importance of, and methodological considerations for, collecting inclusive sex and gender data. Moving forward, we recommend routine collection of gender identity data, an emphasis on intervention research to achieve trans health equity, public policy advocacy, and investment in supporting gender-diverse public health leadership.

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)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.162
GPT teacher head0.501
Teacher spread0.340 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations122
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnnual Review of Public HealthSame topicLGBTQ Health, Identity, and PolicyFrench-language works237,207