Experiences of families of adolescents with gender incongruence in the light of the Calgary Models for Families
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: to know the experiences of family members of adolescents with gender incongruence. METHOD: this is a qualitative case study, supported by the Calgary Family Assessment and Intervention Models theoretical-methodological framework. Data collection took place through semi-structured interviews, participant observation in family groups and document analysis, with eight family members. Data analysis was performed following the precepts of content analysis. RESULTS: with family assessment, two categories emerged: "Challenges in the face of gender transition", which highlighted the problems related to the expectations created at birth, new names, pronouns and gender fluidity and the fear of prejudice, and "Supporting aspects in the face of the possibility of gender transition", which revealed family support as a strong point. CONCLUSION: knowing the experiences allowed us to understand the challenges that family members face when facing physical and emotional aspects of their children's gender transition. It was noticed that the act of seeking help and offering support is important for a healthy transition. The findings provided a better understanding of family issues and provided suggestions on how nursing can develop care for this population.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it