ArticleArchival science2025
The provenance of trans/gender: on the subject's willful disappearance from the record.
Article in Archival science, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
Abstract
In recent years, health and government information systems have made gender variance more visible and countable in the records. However, being counted has created novel forms of vulnerability for transgender and gender-diverse populations. This paper explores the complexity of records in exposing vulnerabilities of marginalization, illustrating how recordkeeping practices may contribute to erasure and stigma and reproduce systems of social disenfranchisement. The paper introduces the concept of 'hostile recordkeeping practices' as a critical analytical lens to articulate observations of marginalization in recordkeeping environments, to discuss indicators of bias, and to develop mechanisms for surfacing issues of trauma, violence, stigma, and repair. Using examples from the published literature, the paper discusses the importance of understanding social interactions which exacerbate marginalization within recordkeeping practices. Based on a case study, the paper argues that the dangers trans and gender-diverse individuals routinely encounter in recordkeeping practices necessitate additional analytical inquiry into hostile recordkeeping practices. The case study contributes to discussions of ethics of care for records for marginalized populations and includes interactional considerations, ethical considerations and historical contexts embedded in recordkeeping systems. The paper closes with an argument for the need to adapt existing recordkeeping practices to safeguard against hostile uses, systemic bias and structural violence. Future archival and medical discourses alike need to engage with the situation(s) of creation, the acts of recording, and, most importantly, personal agency in the negotiations of allowable uses for the records for marginalized populations.
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.