MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4223586235 · doi:10.1007/s10459-022-10112-y

Transgender health content in medical education: a theory-guided systematic review of current training practices and implementation barriers & facilitators

2022· review· en· W4223586235 on OpenAlexaff
Jason O. van Heesewijk, Alex Kent, Tim C. van de Grift, Alex Harleman, Maaike Muntinga

Bibliographic record

VenueAdvances in Health Sciences Education · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicLGBTQ Health, Identity, and Policy
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTransgenderCurriculumPsychological interventionThematic analysisMedical educationPsychologyMedicineQualitative researchNursingPedagogySociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Health disparities faced by transgender people are partly explained by barriers to trans-inclusive healthcare, which in turn are linked to a lack of transgender health education in medical school curricula. We carried out a theory-driven systematic review with the aim to (1) provide an overview of key characteristics of training initiatives and pedagogical features, and (2) analyze barriers and facilitators to implementing this training in medical education. We used queer theory to contextualize our findings. We searched the PubMed/Ovid MEDLINE database (October 2009 to December 2021) for original studies that reported on transgender content within medical schools and residency programs (N = 46). We performed a thematic analysis to identify training characteristics, pedagogical features, barriers and facilitators. Most training consisted of single-session interventions, with varying modes of delivery. Most interventions were facilitated by instructors with a range of professional experience and half covered general LGBT+-content. Thematic analysis highlighted barriers including lack of educational materials, lack of faculty expertise, time/costs constraints, and challenges in recruiting and compensating transgender guest speakers. Facilitators included scaffolding learning throughout the curriculum, drawing on expertise of transgender people and engaging learners in skills-based training. Sustainable implementation of transgender-health objectives in medical education faces persistent institutional barriers. These barriers are rooted in normative biases inherent to biomedical knowledge production, and an understanding of categories of sex and gender as uncomplicated. Medical schools should facilitate trans-inclusive educational strategies to combat transgender-health inequities, which should include a critical stance toward binary conceptualizations of sex and gender throughout the curriculum.

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)0.032
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.110
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.032
Threshold uncertainty score0.169

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0320.110
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0060.006
Bibliometrics0.0190.018
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0040.006
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0020.002
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 head0.317
GPT teacher head0.624
Teacher spread0.307 · 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 designSystematic review
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

Citations110
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAdvances in Health Sciences EducationSame topicLGBTQ Health, Identity, and PolicyFrench-language works237,207