The scope and nature of sexual orientation and gender identity and expression change efforts: A systematic review protocol
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background: Sexual orientation and gender identity and expression change efforts (SOGIECE) are a set of scientifically discredited practices that aim to deny and suppress the sexual orientations, gender identities, and/or gender expressions of sexual and gender minorities (SGMs). SOGIECE are associated with significant adverse health and social outcomes. SOGIECE continue to be practiced around the world, despite denouncements from professional bodies and survivors, as well as calls for legislative advocacy to prohibit SOGIECE and protect SGMs. There are substantial gaps in the availability of consolidated international research to support and refine legislative proposals related to SOGIECE, including those currently underway to enforce bans in Canada and elsewhere. We therefore propose the first systematic review of international data on SOGIECE that will outline the scope and nature of these practices worldwide. Specifically, we aim to estimate how many SGMs have been exposed to SOGIECE, which sub-groups of SGMs experience higher rates of SOGIECE, and how estimates of SOGIECE vary over time and place. In addition, we aim to describe when, where, how, and under what circumstances SGMs are exposed to SOGIECE. Methods: To locate an interdisciplinary swath of papers, nine (9) bibliographic databases will be searched: Medline (OVID), Embase (OVID), PsycInfo and Social Work Abstracts via EBSCO, Web of Science Core Collection, LGBTQ+ Source, Proquest Dissertations & Theses Global and Sociology Collection (ProQuest). A gold standard search will be developed for Medline and adapted to the other databases. Grey literature will be searched at relevant websites, and reference harvesting will be performed in relevant SOGIECE scientific consensus statements. Two authors will independently screen abstracts/titles, screen full texts, abstract data, and apply risk of bias assessments. A narrative synthesis will be implemented to summarize findings. Discussion: This review will address the gap in synthesized data regarding the prevalence of SOGIECE, social correlates of SOGIECE, variations of SOGIECE over time and place, and the circumstances, settings, and time-points of SOGIECE exposure. Findings from this review will directly inform ongoing and new legislative efforts to ban SOGIECE and other interventions that aim to stem SOGIECE practices and support SOGIECE survivors. Systematic Review Registration: Prospective registration with PROSPERO will occur before completion of full-text screening.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.140 | 0.151 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.021 | 0.015 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.028 | 0.024 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.011 |
| Open science | 0.007 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.007 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.040 | 0.005 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".