ReviewInternational journal of impotence research2023
Public understanding of intersex: an update on recent findings.
Review in International journal of impotence research, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed, 31 citations in OpenAlex.
- Awareness, attitudes and acceptance among undergraduate students at king faisal university regarding intersex surgeries: an online survey.BMC public health · 2026Article
- Islamic Jurisprudence, Biomedical Ethics, and the Social Construct in Relation to Intersex People: A Scoping Review.Archives of sexual behavior · 2025Article
- Chronic pain in transgender and gender-diverse youth: a biopsychosocial perspective.Frontiers in pain research (Lausanne, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- The damaging legacy of damage-centered LGBTIQ+ research: Implications for healthcare and LGBTIQ+ health.The Journal of social issues · 2024Article
- Understanding sex and gender: concepts and terminology for gender affirming care.Pediatric radiology · 2024Review
- Differences of sex development and surgical decisions: focus group interviews with health care professionals in Norway.Health psychology and behavioral medicine · 2024Article
- Support for affirmative actions to increase inclusivity of intersex* persons at an Austrian medical university.BMC medical education · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Surgical interventions on infants with intersex characteristics are considered justified by some on the grounds that they carry a high risk of intolerable stigma. However, public understanding of intersex and its medicalization are under-researched. We review recent qualitative and quantitative studies of the understandings of intersex and its medicalization among people who have no particular professional or public experience of intersex. First, such laypeople reason about clinical dilemmas by drawing on values in similar ways as expert healthcare professionals do. Second, laypeople can over-estimate the utility of current 'umbrella terms,' including intersex, for people with direct familial experience of intersex. Third, beliefs about good and bad effects of medical intervention are affected by framing intersex as either a medical condition or the natural basis for a social identity. Fourth, sexual identity is the best evidenced predictor of opinions about early surgical intervention and its legal limitation on human rights grounds. We argue that possible stigmatizing reactions from the public may not be a solid basis on which to justify early surgical intervention on intersex characteristics.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.