Bleeding beyond binaries: a critical interpretive review of trans, non-binary and gender non-conforming experiences with menstruation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
While some barriers for managing menstruation have been mitigated for cisgender women, trans, non-binary, and gender non-conforming people still struggle to navigate menstruation in a gendered society. With an increasing number of young people identifying outside of the gender binary, there is an immediate need to identify and address the barriers to managing menstruation. This review sets out to explore how trans, non-binary, and gender non-conforming people experience and navigate menstruation. Using critical interpretive synthesis methodology, nine pieces of literature including peer-reviewed journal articles, graduate theses, a book chapter, and a conference poster presentation were reviewed using thematic analysis. Four primary themes were identified: (1) menstruation is strongly gendered; (2) there exists inadequate trans, non-binary, and gender non-conforming education and healthcare training; (3) the gendering of public toilets/washrooms poses a barrier to the management of menstruation; and (4) there exists a lack of diverse participants and attention to intersectional menstruation concerns. A set of recommendations, specific to a variety of stakeholders is provided, and implications for future research are discussed.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".