Psychological and Physical Health Outcomes Associated with Gender-Affirming Medical Care for Transgender and Gender-Diverse Youth: A Critical Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: Access of transgender and gender diverse (TGD) youth to gender-affirming medical care (GAMC) has become a contentious topic in the West, with many members of the general population, politicians, and even some experts and academic researchers voicing concerns about possible adverse effects of GAMC on the mental and physical health of TGD youth. Due to these concerns, recent years have seen a significant rise in legislation restricting TGD youth from accessing GAMC in countries such as the United States, the United Kingdom, and Canada. However, in this critical review of the literature on the psychological (e.g., anxiety, depression, suicide, and body satisfaction) and physical (e.g., bone health, cognitive function, and fertility) health outcomes associated with GAMC among TGD youth, we argue that, given the state of current research, youth should not be restricted from accessing GAMC. Conclusions: Our findings reinforce the importance of close monitoring by doctors, counselling for TGD youth with respect to potential risks, and increased studies on the topic, especially those focusing on reproductive health.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".