MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4394785679 · doi:10.1111/bjdp.12486

Autistic and non‐autistic transgender youth are similar in gender development and sexuality phenotypes

2024· article· en· W4394785679 on OpenAlexaff
Abigail L. Fischbach, Andy Hindenach, Anna I. R. van der Miesen, Ji Seung Yang, Olivia J. Buckley, Minneh Song, Laura Campos, John F. Strang

Bibliographic record

VenueBritish Journal of Developmental Psychology · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicAutism Spectrum Disorder Research
Canadian institutionsCentre for Addiction and Mental Health
FundersNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsAutismTransgenderHuman sexualityPsychologyDiversity (politics)Developmental psychologyClinical psychologyGender studiesPolitical scienceSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Increasing rhetoric regarding the common intersection of autism and gender diversity has resulted in legislation banning autistic transgender youth from accessing standard of care supports, as well as legislative efforts banning all youth gender care in part justified by the proportional over‐occurrence of autism. Yet, no study has investigated whether autistic and non‐autistic transgender youth present fundamentally different gender‐related phenotypes. To address this gap, we extensively characterized autism, gender diversity, and sexuality among autistic and non‐autistic transgender binary youth ( N = 66, M age = 17.17, SD age = 2.12) in order to investigate similarities and/or differences in gender and sexuality phenotypes. Neither autism diagnostic status nor continuous autistic traits were significantly related to any gender or sexuality phenotypes. These findings suggest that the developmental and experiential features of gender diversity are very similar between autistic and non‐autistic transgender adolescents. Future research is needed to determine whether the similarity in profiles is maintained over time into adulthood.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.856
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.077
GPT teacher head0.343
Teacher spread0.266 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
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

Citations11
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBritish Journal of Developmental PsychologySame topicAutism Spectrum Disorder ResearchFrench-language works237,207