Nutritional considerations for gender-diverse people: a qualitative mini review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Dietitians working with gender-diverse people may require different skills and knowledge than those caring for cisgender men and women, as indicated by a growing body of literature that highlights gender-diverse people's unique experiences with and relationships to nutrition and eating behaviors. To provide insight into how dietitians can best serve this population, this mini review identifies and summarizes qualitative studies that investigate gender-diverse people's lived experiences and perspectives regarding nutrition, eating disorders, and access to eating-related healthcare services. Fourteen studies examining nutrition or eating behaviors among gender-diverse samples were selected through a systematic search and screening process: 11 focused on disordered eating or eating disorders and the remaining three focused on nutritional needs, nutritional knowledge, and food insecurity. Extracted themes included: using dietary restriction to suppress secondary sex characteristics or conform to societal norms; the impact of gender-affirming care on disordered eating; negative experiences with, and beliefs about, nutrition and eating disorders healthcare services; and suggestions for clinicians. Recommendations discuss the need for increased trans literacy among clinicians, the creation of safe spaces for gender-diverse people with eating disorders, and the importance of dual competencies in eating disorders treatment and gender-affirming care.
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".