MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4249785943 · doi:10.17816/cp61

Depathologizing Sexual Orientation and Transgender Identities in Psychiatric Classifications

2021· article· en· W4249785943 on OpenAlexaff
Rebeca Robles, Tania Real, Geoffrey M. Reed

Bibliographic record

VenueConsortium Psychiatricum · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicLGBTQ Health, Identity, and Policy
Canadian institutionsColumbia College
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSexual orientationTransgenderConceptualizationHomosexualityPsychologyMental healthIdentity (music)Gender identityHuman rightsGender Identity DisorderSexual identityScientific literaturePsychiatrySocial psychologyClinical psychologySociologyPolitical scienceGender studiesHuman sexualityLawComputer sciencePsychoanalysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: This article presents the history and rationales of conceptualization and classification of homosexuality and transgender identity in both ICD and DSM. We review the efforts that have been made (and those that remain pending) to improve psychiatric classifications with new scientific knowledge, changing social attitudes and human rights standards. Method: We conducted a literature search of the classification of homosexuality and transgender identity as mental disorders. Result: We provide a historical description of these concepts in ICD and DSM, including fundamental points of disagreement as well as arguments that have been effective in achieving changes in both classifications. Conclusions: (ICD-11) in terms of the classification of sexual orientation and gender identity based on scientific evidence and the ICD's public health objectives. These changes might support the provision of accessible and high-quality healthcare services, and are responsive to the needs, experience and human rights of the populations involved.

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)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.071

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0080.006
Science and technology studies0.0020.021
Scholarly communication0.0070.005
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0010.003
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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.356
Teacher spread0.313 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations18
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueConsortium PsychiatricumSame topicLGBTQ Health, Identity, and PolicyFrench-language works237,207