MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4220790729 · doi:10.7202/1087101ar

Regards croisés de jeunes trans et de leurs parents sur la transition médicale au Canada : quel impact sur l’épanouissement des jeunes?

2022· article· en· W4220790729 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Morgane A. Gelly, Annie Pullen Sansfaçon

Bibliographic record

VenueRevue Jeunes et Société · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicLGBTQ Health, Identity, and Policy
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGender dysphoriaPsychologyPaceIntersubjectivityMedical careDevelopmental psychologySociologySocial psychologyGender identityMedicineNursingSocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The past decade has witnessed significant change in medical care for trans youth. A well-established pathologizing approach focused on asserting a young person’s assigned gender has been challenged by a growing number of experts who favour a model that supports gender exploration (e.g., by providing access to hormonal treatments and puberty blockers). Based on interviews with 36 parent-youth dyads (72 interviews in total), this article explores the expectations and impacts associated with medical transition. On the one hand, the interview data show that young people and their parents agree that access to trans-affirmative medical care has a positive impact on youth development. Specifically, it is seen to reduce suffering associated with gender dysphoria, while promoting both self-recognition and intersubjectivity. On the other hand, the interview data highlight the extent to which available health care pathways (often based on a binary approach) have failed to keep pace with the expectations and concerns of youth and their parents. Our article therefore emphasizes the importance of offering transaffirmative care adapted to the needs of youth seeking to transition.

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 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), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.100
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
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 head0.060
GPT teacher head0.396
Teacher spread0.336 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations6
Published2022
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRevue Jeunes et SociétéSame topicLGBTQ Health, Identity, and PolicyFrench-language works237,207