MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

<b>A critical exploration of stigma interventions and programs for queer peoples across the life course in Canada: a scoping review</b> <b>protocol</b>

2025· article· en· W6920925646 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueFigshare · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicLGBTQ Health, Identity, and Policy
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCINAHLPsychological interventionStigma (botany)PsycINFOQueerMental healthSexual minoritySocial stigma

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objective: This scoping review aims to critically explore the current state of interventions and programs designed to reduce queer-related stigma across the life course in Canada, with an emphasis on understanding their impact, successes, and gaps.Introduction: Queer populations (sexual and gender diverse people, including two-spirit, lesbian, gay, bisexual, trans, and queer) in Canada face significant health disparities, largely driven by stigma related to sexual and gender identities. These inequities are associated with higher rates of mental health issues, substance abuse, suicidality, and other adverse outcomes. Although a growing body of literature examines stigma reduction, interventions often focus on specific types of queer stigma, such as sexual minority stigma or HIV stigma, rather than considering the broader, intersectional experiences of queer people. This review will map the landscape of stigma-reduction interventions for queer populations across Canada, aiming to identify key trends, effectiveness, and areas for improvement.Inclusion Criteria: This review will include studies that address interventions aimed at reducing queer-related stigma in Canadian contexts. Eligible studies must focus on queer populations, including individuals from diverse sexual and gender identities, and measure outcomes related to stigma reduction. Studies of any design (qualitative, quantitative, mixed methods), published in English or French, and from any year will be considered.Methods: A systematic search will be conducted across multiple databases, including Medline-R (Ovid), Embase (Ovid), APA PsycInfo (Ovid), CINAHL (EBSCO), Social Services Abstracts (ProQuest), Social Science Abstracts (ProQuest), and Social Science Citation Index (Web of Science), along with grey literature sources. Two reviewers will independently assess potential articles against the inclusion criteria through two stages: titles and abstracts as well as full-text screening. Data extraction will focus on study characteristics, intervention details, and outcomes related to stigma reduction. Findings will be summarized in tables and narrative summaries, guided by the socioecological model and intersectional queer theories. Data will be analyzed to identify trends and gaps in current interventions aimed at addressing queer stigma.

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)0.039
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.102
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.153
Threshold uncertainty score0.982

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0390.102
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.005
Bibliometrics0.0130.020
Science and technology studies0.0080.003
Scholarly communication0.0100.004
Open science0.0050.004
Research integrity0.0050.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.001

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 head0.179
GPT teacher head0.517
Teacher spread0.339 · 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 designNot applicable
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 venueFigshare→Same topicLGBTQ Health, Identity, and Policy→French-language works237,207→