MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4229814390 · doi:10.46692/9781447313519.016

Maximising research outcomes for trans children and their families in Canada using social action and other participatory methods of inquiry

2015· other· en· W4229814390 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Annie Pullen Sansfaçon, Kimberley Ens Manning

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typeother
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicLGBTQ Health, Identity, and Policy
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsParticipatory action researchCitizen journalismAction (physics)Action researchSociologyPsychologyPedagogyComputer scienceWorld Wide WebAnthropologyPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction ‘To me it's really that, it's that the person who has a gender creative child or trans child or fluid or whatnot, is not going to be shoved or pushed by the medical community or the school community or social services and get their kid taken away. Like that was my biggest fear at that point when I started out, was that my kid was going to be taken away.’ (Akiko Asano, President of Gender Creative Kids Canada, 8 May 2013) Akiko Asano is a single parent of two children, the youngest of whom, Mat, who was born a biological boy, identifies as trans. Now aged 15, Mat was just two when she began to show a strong preference for wearing dresses and playing with dolls, and began to live as a girl full time at the age of four. Although many in Akiko's community were supportive of her parenting, not all were, and when Mat was about six, Akiko was briefly investigated by social services. The complaint? That Akiko was trying to change her child's ‘sexual orientation’. Although the case was quickly dismissed, many other North American families have not been so lucky. Indeed, although there is still limited evidence, some children have been forcibly removed from the care of parents who allow their children to live in accordance with their felt sense of gender (see Manning et al, forthcoming, for a discussion of child apprehension prompted by a child's gender non-conformity). A growing body of scholarship suggests that childhood gender non-conformity is a natural part of human diversity. Indeed, research suggests that between 2.3% and 8.3% of children (Moller et al, 2009, pp 118-19) engage in varying degrees of cross-gender dress and behaviour, and of those, a small number will end up following through with gender change interventions later on in their lives (Meyer, 2012). The problem is, Western society continues to be structured on the basis of a gender binary in which a child's failure to conform to their assigned birth sex, has often resulted in the pathologisation of parent and child (Langer and Martin, 2004). The fact that another member of Akiko's community viewed her parenting as ‘harmful’ and thus requiring state intervention, suggests the degree to which gross misunderstandings about gender identity continue to prevail.

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)0.063
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.040
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.128
Threshold uncertainty score0.925

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0630.040
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.006
Science and technology studies0.0330.011
Scholarly communication0.0110.003
Open science0.0040.012
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.559
GPT teacher head0.590
Teacher spread0.030 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations2
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicLGBTQ Health, Identity, and Policy→French-language works237,207→