Psychosocial support interventions for children and adolescents experiencing gender dysphoria or incongruence: a systematic review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: National and international guidelines recommend that psychosocial support should be a key component of the care offered to children and adolescents experiencing gender dysphoria/incongruence. However, specific approaches or interventions are not recommended. AIM: To identify and summarise evidence on the outcomes of psychosocial support interventions for children and adolescents (age 0-18) experiencing gender dysphoria/incongruence. METHODS: Systematic review and narrative synthesis. Database searches (MEDLINE; EMBASE; CINAHL; PsycINFO; Web of Science) were performed in April 2022, with results assessed independently by two reviewers. Peer-reviewed articles reporting the results of studies measuring outcomes of psychosocial support interventions were included. Quality was assessed using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool. RESULTS: Ten studies were included. Half were conducted in the US, with others from Australia, Canada, New Zealand and the UK. Six were pre-post analyses or cohort studies, three were mixed methods, and one was a secondary analysis of intervention data from four trials. Most studies were of low quality. Most analyses of mental health and psychosocial outcomes showed either benefit or no change, with none indicating negative or adverse effects. CONCLUSIONS: The small number of low-quality studies limits conclusions about the effectiveness of psychosocial interventions for children/adolescents experiencing gender dysphoria/incongruence. Clarity on the intervention approach as well as the core outcomes would support the future aggregation of evidence. More robust methodology and reporting is required. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42021289659.
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 | 0.009 | 0.032 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.007 | 0.006 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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 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".