MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408082725 · doi:10.1080/15532739.2025.2464229

A scoping review of the lived experiences of gender diverse children and youth with disabilities

2025· review· en· W4408082725 on OpenAlexafffund
Van Slothouber, Sarah Leo, Sally Lindsay

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Transgender Health · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicLGBTQ Health, Identity, and Policy
Canadian institutionsToronto Rehabilitation InstituteUniversity of TorontoHolland Bloorview Kids Rehabilitation Hospital
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research CouncilAmerican Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry
KeywordsLived experiencePsychologyDevelopmental psychologyGender studiesSociologyPsychotherapist

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Research exploring the lived experiences of gender diverse children and youth with disabilities is still in its infancy. Previous research has either focused on adults or has lumped the experiences of trans and nonbinary children and youth with disabilities in with broader findings of 2SLGBTQI + youth with disabilities. This is problematic given that experiences of sexual diversity are different than experiences of gender diversity and the experiences of children and youth are not identical to adults. Aims: We conducted a scoping review to map and synthesize research that explores the lived experiences of young people with disabilities who also identify as trans, nonbinary, or gender diverse. The question guiding the review was: what are the lived experiences of gender diverse children and youth with disabilities? Methods: We followed Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) best practices in scoping review methodology in addition to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses, extension for scoping reviews (PRISMA-ScR) checklist. We searched seven databases: Ovid Medline, Healthstar, Embase, PsycINFO, Scopus, Sociological Abstracts, and Web of Science for empirical peer-reviewed research. Results: We identified 21 articles that met our inclusion criteria, with an additional 2 articles found from other sources, resulting in 23 included articles. We organized the data in the available research into the following three overarching categories: (1) Experiences of discrimination and abuse; (2) Impact of minoritized identities on health; and (3) Coping strategies of, and interventions to support, gender minoritized youth with disabilities. Conclusions: Our review shows that gender diverse children and youth with disabilities are at increased risk of experiencing discrimination and abuse, which impacts their psychological well-being and quality of life. We conclude that this population requires increased opportunities to socialize in affirming and inclusive environments and greater supports for accessing social and medical transition.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.296
Threshold uncertainty score0.586

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.170
GPT teacher head0.476
Teacher spread0.306 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSystematic review
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

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Transgender HealthSame topicLGBTQ Health, Identity, and PolicyFrench-language works237,207