MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4416784080 · doi:10.1017/s1474746425101176

LGBT+ Inclusion and Human Rights in Taiwan: A Scoping Review of the Literature

2025· review· en· W4416784080 on OpenAlexaff
Yu‐Te Huang, Chenxi Yang, Leo Zephyrus Chow, Suchon Tepjan, Holning Lau, Duy A Dinh, Peter A. Newman

Bibliographic record

VenueSocial Policy and Society · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicLGBTQ Health, Identity, and Policy
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVanguardInclusion (mineral)Human rightsInclusion–exclusion principleJurisdictionLesbianPolitics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Taiwan is regarded as the vanguard of LGBT+ rights in Asia. We conducted a scoping review to map research on LGBT+ inclusion in Taiwan, identify knowledge gaps and propose future directions for research and policy. Results indicate a predominant focus on health, with the over-representation of gay men and exclusion of lesbian and bisexual women and transgender/gender diverse people. Despite being the first Asian jurisdiction to legalise same-sex marriage, insufficient policy protections were evidenced concerning family formation, adoption, and parenting, with family systems that largely exclude LGBT+ people. Findings reveal pervasive discrimination and exclusion in education, an economic system that restricts LGBT+ people’s employment opportunities and advancement, and a healthcare system that lacks competencies in serving LGBT+ people. Future research on LGBT+ inclusion in Taiwan should address understudied populations, provide disaggregated data on LGBT+ individuals, and advance evidence to support policy protections in education, economic, family, health, and political domains.

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 categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.527
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.473
Teacher spread0.432 · 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 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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSocial Policy and SocietySame topicLGBTQ Health, Identity, and PolicyFrench-language works237,207