ReviewTransgender health2022
A Critical Review of Clinical Practice Guidelines for Care of Transgender and Gender Diverse Children and Youth for Use by Primary Care Practitioners.
Review in Transgender health, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Critically appraising the cass report: methodological flaws and unsupported claims.BMC medical research methodology · 2025Article
- Towards Best-Practice Healthcare for Transgender Patients: Quality Improvement in United Kingdom General Practice.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: To examine and critique international clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) related to transgender and gender diverse children and youth and to assess the applicability of the guidelines to ethical and affirming primary care practice. Methods: A review was conducted to obtain English language clinical guidelines. Guidelines were obtained from electronic databases, medical associations, government agencies, and community organizations. Guidelines were critiqued by all authors using the AGREE II instrument. Results: Nine documents were reviewed. Overall, there was agreement among reviewers that the scope, purpose, and clarity of presentation of the guidelines was carried out well. Areas identified for improvement in all guidelines included clarity/rigor of methodologic development, inclusion of community stakeholders, and transparency of editorial independence. The Conclusion: The use of specific, high-quality CPGs can support primary care practitioners to provide gender-affirming care to children and youth. Methodologic improvement in the development of these CPGs is needed to ensure the best possible quality of care is being outlined.
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.