MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4414239184 · doi:10.2196/83928

Mental Health, Gender Dysphoria, and Quality of Life in Trans Individuals Following Top Surgery: A Prospective Cohort Study Protocol (Preprint)

2025· preprint· en· W4414239184 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Julia Bak, Kah Aik Tan, Jack Ball, Sam Bonney, Julia K. Moore, Blake Stockton Cavve, Larissa Marion, Timothy Hewitt, Sav Zwickl, Simone Mahfouda, Ashleigh Lin, Penelope Strauss

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Research Protocols · 2025
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicLGBTQ Health, Identity, and Policy
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProspective cohort studyQuality of life (healthcare)Thematic analysisLongitudinal studyCohort studyProtocol (science)CohortMental healthRepeated measures designPsychological intervention

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Top surgery refers to various gender-affirming surgical procedures involving breast or chest tissue. Existing research suggests top surgery improves physical, psychological, and social well-being in transgender and gender-diverse individuals (herein “trans”) who desire it. However, most studies have been retrospective, have not used validated outcome measures, and have excluded nonbinary individuals, limiting the robustness of the existing research. Objective This study aims to examine changes in mental health, gender dysphoria, risky behaviors, and quality of life of trans people (including nonbinary individuals) following top surgery. Methods Trans individuals aged 16 years and older undergoing top surgery will be recruited from a single surgeon’s office in Perth, Western Australia, as part of a longitudinal, prospective cohort study. Questionnaires will be administered to participants at 3 time points: within 8 weeks prior to surgery, 6‐8 weeks post surgery, and 1 year post surgery. These questionnaires will collect data on patient demographics, planning and expectations for surgery, support received during surgery access, satisfaction with care received from their surgeon, use of gender-affirming hormones, mental health (ie, anxiety, depression, self-harm and suicide, and mental health diagnoses), gender euphoria and dysphoria, exercise and diet, disordered eating, quality of life, substance use, social acceptance and discrimination, and reflections on the experience and outcomes of their surgery. Patient-reported outcomes will be measured using validated instruments and bespoke items developed through community consultation. Validated instruments include the GENDER-Q (health professional subscale); the Generalized Anxiety Disorder 7-item; the Patient Health Questionnaire-9; the Gender Euphoria Scale; an adapted version of the Olson-Kennedy Chest Dysphoria Scale; the International Physical Activity Questionnaire - Short Form; the Eating Disorder Examination Questionnaire - Short; the Assessment of Quality of Life 8 Dimensions; and the Alcohol, Smoking, and Substance Involvement Screening Test - Short Form. Surgical satisfaction will be assessed using both patient- and surgeon-reported measures, enabling between-group comparisons. Quantitative data will be analyzed using linear regression models and repeated-measures ANOVA to compare outcomes across the 3 time points; qualitative data will undergo a general inductive approach to analysis to produce categories that contextualize and supplement the quantitative findings, as well as identify any novel or unexpected experiences. Results This study received funding in February 2024. Data collection commenced in May 2025 and is expected to be completed by December 2027. As of February 2026, 26 people have consented to participate. Conclusions This study will extend research on the mental health, gender dysphoria, and quality-of-life outcomes of top surgery for trans individuals in Australia. By addressing limitations of existing research, this study aims to improve our understanding of trans people’s experience accessing and receiving top surgery. The findings may guide improvements in perioperative and postoperative care and support for patients and inform policy related to gender-affirming surgeries in Australia.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.012
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.028
Threshold uncertainty score0.092

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0040.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0280.011

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 head0.343
GPT teacher head0.625
Teacher spread0.281 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreProtocol

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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Research Protocols→Same topicLGBTQ Health, Identity, and Policy→French-language works237,207→