MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4382893895 · doi:10.1111/jnu.12922

Erasure of the young trans person: A critical discursive review of contemporary health care literature

2023· review· en· W4382893895 on OpenAlexaff
Zoë Sitas, Kath Peters, Lauretta Luck, Rochelle Einboden

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Nursing Scholarship · 2023
Typereview
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicLGBTQ Health, Identity, and Policy
Canadian institutionsChildren's Hospital of Eastern OntarioUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCINAHLGatekeepingHealth careQualitative researchPerspective (graphical)SociologyPsychologySocial psychologyGender studiesNursingMedicinePolitical sciencePsychological interventionSocial scienceLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Trans youth experience significantly higher rates of societal violence and ill-health compared to their cisgender peers. Although recent clinical guidelines for trans young people in health have paved the way for revolutionizing care, many trans young people still experience adversity in clinical settings. This discursive literature review provides a novel approach in exploring why trans young people experience violence in health care despite the availability of evidence-based resources and guidelines. DESIGN: Databases (CINAHL and Scopus) were systematically searched to identify qualitative literature on the experiences of trans young people (<18 years) in health care settings. METHOD: Rather than synthesizing and presenting the literature, Fairclough's (2001) CDA methodology was used to critically analyze the literature as texts in a data corpus. The authors engaged with the data from a critical social theory perspective. RESULTS: Fifteen qualitative articles and one report (n = 16) on the experiences of trans young people (3-24 years) in health care settings were included. Two key discourses were identified in the literature. First, discourses that constituted the trans young person were identified in the definitions of 'trans' as a pathological incongruence and as alternate, self-determined ways of being. Further discourses were identified in the constitution of trans young people as victims, extra-pathological, and alternatively problematised as socially dysphoric. Second, discourses in health provider responses were identified in dismissive, gatekeeping, regulatory, and respectful practices. DISCUSSION: The discursive constitution of the trans young person as incongruent, vulnerable, and pathological is constituted and generated by dismissive, gatekeeping, and regulatory practices of health care providers. The analysis reveals how trans young people are considered pathological and deemed treatable (at the site of the body), in the interest of 'protecting' them from a perceived abject future of trans adulthood. The logic and violence of cisgenderism is uncovered as the foundation of these dominant discourses, whereby growing up cisgender is often presented as the only option in health care settings. The dominant discourses that constitute the trans young person in health care as incongruent, pathological, and vulnerable, alongside the reifying health care responses of dismissal, gatekeeping, and regulation contribute to the erasure of the young trans person. CONCLUSION: This paper identified key discourses in the literature in how trans young people are constituted and regulated in health care. This review highlights an urgent need for further critical scholarship in trans health by trans researchers, from critical perspectives. Furthermore, it provides a starting point for critical reflection of health care provider and researcher practices and the re-imagination of trans-futurity for all young people in health care. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Nurses are situated at the forefront of health care delivery and play a crucial role in the advocacy and provision of culturally safe care. With this ideal proximity to clients, nurses can powerfully affect change through better understanding and reflecting on how regulatory practices constitute and position trans young people in health care. Nursing knowledge, such as cultural safety, can offer novel approaches in working towards safer ways of meeting the needs of trans young people.

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)0.044
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.078
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: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.044
Threshold uncertainty score0.234

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0440.078
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.002
Bibliometrics0.0410.030
Science and technology studies0.0080.018
Scholarly communication0.0140.012
Open science0.0030.007
Research integrity0.0050.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.251
GPT teacher head0.526
Teacher spread0.276 · 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
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

Citations5
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Nursing ScholarshipSame topicLGBTQ Health, Identity, and PolicyFrench-language works237,207